RECD: April 2024
Background
This is a preregistered replication of RECD: March 2024d.
Preregistration
Hypotheses
- Competitive worldview will be positively associated with perceived
relational benefit from managers’ dominant behaviors (i.e., those higher
in competitive worldview will perceive fewer relational costs to
dominant behaviors).
- Competitive worldview will be positively associated with
self-reported hypothetical dominant behavior as a manager.
- The relationship between competitive worldview and self-reported hypothetical dominant behavior as a manager will be at least partially explained by perceived relational benefit from dominant behaviors.
Design
In a correlational design, participants will: (1) complete a measure
of competitive worldview; and (2) answer questions about an instance of
dominant behavior.
In the former, they will read one of 23 descriptions of dominant
behaviors. We previously asked part- or full-time employees to describe
a time in which their manager behaved dominantly towards them in an
attempt to get them to do something at work. Our criteria for these
descriptions were: (1) that they describe a specific incident (rather
than overall demeanor); (2) that the behavior was intended to get them
to comply with something; and (3) that the behavior was dominant. See
Materials file for all descriptions.
Participants of the current study will estimate the impact of this
behavior on the relationship between the employee and the manager, the
employee’s compliance with the request, and the employee’s desire to
quit or exit the relationship in any way. They will also be asked to
indicate the likelihood that they would behave like the manager did in
the description, if they were the manager trying to get their employee
complete the task at hand.
Analysis plan
- Fixed Effects Model #1: Perceived relational benefit as the outcome
variable; competitive worldview as predictor; original description as
fixed effect; race, gender, income, education, and age as control
variables.
- Fixed Effects Model #2: Intentions of dominant behavior as outcome
variable; competitive worldview as predictor; original description as
fixed effect; race, gender, income, education, and age as control
variables.
- Fixed Effects Mediation Model: Intentions of dominant behavior as outcome variable; perceived relational benefit as mediator; competitive worldview as predictor; original description as fixed effect; race, gender, income, education, and age as control variables.
Attention checks
There was an attention check. Just asking participants to select a certain point on the scale.
| att_1 | n |
|---|---|
| 0 | 5 |
| 1 | 296 |
Great. 296 eligible.
Demographics
Race
| race | N | Perc |
|---|---|---|
| asian | 32 | 10.81 |
| black | 24 | 8.11 |
| hispanic | 19 | 6.42 |
| multiracial | 17 | 5.74 |
| white | 197 | 66.55 |
| NA | 7 | 2.36 |
Gender
| gender | N | Perc |
|---|---|---|
| man | 160 | 54.05 |
| woman | 133 | 44.93 |
| NA | 3 | 1.01 |
Age
| age_mean | age_sd |
|---|---|
| 37.48288 | 11.05172 |
Education
| edu | N | Perc |
|---|---|---|
| GED | 63 | 21.28 |
| 2yearColl | 26 | 8.78 |
| 4yearColl | 149 | 50.34 |
| MA | 46 | 15.54 |
| PHD | 12 | 4.05 |
Income
Employment
| employment | N | Perc |
|---|---|---|
| Full-time | 215 | 72.64 |
| Full-time, Student | 1 | 0.34 |
| Full-time, Temporarily laid off | 1 | 0.34 |
| Homemaker | 3 | 1.01 |
| Other | 1 | 0.34 |
| Part-time | 64 | 21.62 |
| Part-time, Other | 1 | 0.34 |
| Part-time, Student | 2 | 0.68 |
| Retired | 1 | 0.34 |
| Student | 2 | 0.68 |
| Unemployed | 5 | 1.69 |
add binary column for those who are not full-time or part-time employees. I can run the analyses with and without them. Saying this because I realize I didn’t preregister this as exclusion criteria.
Measures
Competitive Worldview
1 = Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly Agree
1. It’s a dog-eat-dog world where you have to be ruthless at times
2. Life is not governed by the “survival of the fittest.” We should let
compassion and moral laws be our guide [R]
3. There is really no such thing as “right” and “wrong.” It all boils
down to what you can get away with
4. One of the most useful skills a person should develop is how to look
someone straight in the eye and lie convincingly
5. It is better to be loved than to be feared [R]
6. My knowledge and experience tell me that the social world we live in
is basically a competitive “jungle” in which the fittest survive and
succeed, in which power, wealth, and winning are everything, and might
is right
7. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and never do
anything unfair to someone else [R]
8. Basically people are objects to be quietly and coolly manipulated for
one’s own benefit
9. Honesty is the best policy in all cases [R]
10. One should give others the benefit of the doubt. Most people are
trustworthy if you have faith in them [R]
Cronbach’s alpha = 0.81
Relational impact
In your opinion, what was the impact of this incident on the employee’s relationship with this manager? (1 = It had a strong negative effect on their relationship with their manager to 7 = It had a strong positive effect on their relationship with their manager)
Compliance impact
In your opinion, to what extent did the employee comply with what the manager was seeking or requesting? (1 = They did not comply at all with what the manager was seeking to 7 = They completely complied with what the manager was seeking)
Exiting impact
In your opinion, what was the impact of this incident on the employee’s intentions to leave this manager or job (such as quitting or transferring)? (1 = It greatly decreased their intentions to leave their manager to 7 = It greatly increased their intentions to leave their manager)
Own behavior
If you were a manager in this kind of situation, how likely would you be to act in the way the manager did, as described earlier? (1 = Not at All Likely to 5 = Extremely Likely)
Correlations
Analysis Plan
Fixed effects model 1
Perceived relational benefit as the outcome variable; competitive worldview as predictor; original description as fixed effect; race, gender, income, education, and age as control variables.
| Term | \(\hat{\beta}\) | 95% CI | \(t\) | \(\mathit{df}\) | \(p\) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 1.70 | [1.01, 2.39] | 4.83 | 274.62 | < .001 |
| CWV | 0.08 | [-0.05, 0.20] | 1.21 | 272.18 | .227 |
| Age | 0.00 | [-0.01, 0.01] | 0.09 | 267.59 | .928 |
| Race white | -0.03 | [-0.27, 0.21] | -0.23 | 270.69 | .819 |
| As numericedu | 0.01 | [-0.10, 0.12] | 0.18 | 268.84 | .860 |
| As numericincome | -0.05 | [-0.09, -0.01] | -2.22 | 266.83 | .028 |
without controls:
Table: (#tab:unnamed-chunk-18)
| Term | \(\hat{\beta}\) | 95% CI | \(t\) | \(\mathit{df}\) | \(p\) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 1.48 | [1.10, 1.86] | 7.62 | 207.37 | < .001 |
| CWV | 0.08 | [-0.04, 0.20] | 1.35 | 288.34 | .177 |
oh boy.
Fixed effects model 2
Intentions of dominant behavior as outcome variable; competitive worldview as predictor; original description as fixed effect; race, gender, income, education, and age as control variables.
| Term | \(\hat{\beta}\) | 95% CI | \(t\) | \(\mathit{df}\) | \(p\) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 1.13 | [0.41, 1.84] | 3.10 | 274.31 | .002 |
| CWV | 0.19 | [0.06, 0.32] | 2.95 | 270.48 | .003 |
| Age | 0.00 | [-0.01, 0.01] | -0.36 | 266.29 | .720 |
| Race white | 0.21 | [-0.03, 0.45] | 1.68 | 268.94 | .094 |
| As numericedu | 0.00 | [-0.11, 0.11] | -0.03 | 267.27 | .978 |
| As numericincome | -0.04 | [-0.08, 0.01] | -1.64 | 265.60 | .102 |
hmm.
Exploratory Analysis
Fixed Effects Model
Perceived compliance as the outcome variable; competitive worldview as predictor; original description as fixed effect; race, gender, income, education, and age as control variables.
| Term | \(\hat{\beta}\) | 95% CI | \(t\) | \(\mathit{df}\) | \(p\) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 5.20 | [3.72, 6.67] | 6.89 | 266.14 | < .001 |
| CWV | -0.27 | [-0.53, -0.01] | -2.06 | 263.68 | .040 |
| Age | 0.00 | [-0.02, 0.02] | 0.13 | 260.42 | .900 |
| Race white | 0.09 | [-0.41, 0.58] | 0.34 | 262.23 | .731 |
| As numericedu | -0.11 | [-0.33, 0.11] | -0.96 | 260.97 | .337 |
| As numericincome | -0.02 | [-0.11, 0.07] | -0.52 | 259.88 | .604 |
oh no.
Fixed Effects Model
Perceived quitting intentions as the outcome variable; competitive worldview as predictor; original description as fixed effect; race, gender, income, education, and age as control variables.
| Term | \(\hat{\beta}\) | 95% CI | \(t\) | \(\mathit{df}\) | \(p\) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 6.15 | [5.07, 7.23] | 11.15 | 274.59 | < .001 |
| CWV | -0.25 | [-0.45, -0.05] | -2.51 | 274.96 | .013 |
| Age | 0.00 | [-0.01, 0.02] | 0.15 | 272.45 | .883 |
| Race white | -0.21 | [-0.59, 0.17] | -1.09 | 274.61 | .275 |
| As numericedu | 0.06 | [-0.10, 0.23] | 0.74 | 273.59 | .458 |
| As numericincome | 0.02 | [-0.05, 0.09] | 0.46 | 271.94 | .645 |
this is a bummer.