Participants

Final N = 57

M age = 39.25

Vignettes

In this study, we are going to give you some information about an individual and ask you to imagine that you actually work with that person as your manager.
Regardless of your actual workplace experiences and relationships, please try your best to put yourself into the shoes of someone who reports to this person and think about what it would feel like to have them as your manager.
For the next few minutes, please immerse yourself in the following scenario.

Lucas has been your direct manager for the past year. During this time, you have interacted regularly through team projects and one-on-one meetings and have become familiar with how Lucas thinks and communicates.

Although your relationship with Lucas is generally positive and pleasant, you would not describe your relationship as particularly close. If one of you left the company, you probably wouldn’t stay in touch.

High Shared Reality: Whenever you talk, however, you feel like you are immediately “on the same wavelength.” You usually share the same thoughts and feelings about things, and you tend to interpret events in the same way. In conversation, you often build on each other’s ideas and develop a joint perspective. You get the sense that you see the world in the same way.

Low Shared Reality: Whenever you talk, you feel like you are not really “on the same wavelength.” You don’t usually share the same thoughts or feelings about things, and you tend to interpret events differently. In conversation, you don’t really build on each other’s ideas or develop a joint perspective. You get the sense that you don’t see the world in the same way.

Take a moment to imagine coming to your office each day and interacting with Lucas and working with a manager like him.

Please rate your agreement with the following statements as if you worked with Lucas as your manager

Shared Reality

(8-items; Rossignac-Milon et al 2021)
In my interactions with Laura/Lucas… …we think of things at the exact same time….we often develop a joint perspective.
  srg
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 2.29 2.01 – 2.58 <0.001
condition [1] 3.18 2.78 – 3.59 <0.001
Observations 57
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.821 / 0.818

Was our manipulation effective? YES

LMX

(7-items; Liden & Maslyn, 1998)
I like Laura/Lucas very much as a person.
I would do work for Laura/Lucas that goes beyond what is specified in my job description.
I respect Laura/Lucas’s knowledge of and competence on the job. …

  lmx
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 3.88 3.58 – 4.17 <0.001
condition [1] 1.22 0.81 – 1.64 <0.001
Observations 57
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.386 / 0.375

Did we also manipulate LMX? YES

Work Meaning

(3-items; adapted from Spreitzer, 1995)
Please rate your agreement with the following statements as if you worked with Logan/Lana.
The work would feel very important to me
My job activities would be personally meaningful to me
The work would be meaningful to me

  wm
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 4.57 4.18 – 4.97 <0.001
condition [1] 0.73 0.17 – 1.28 0.011
Observations 57
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.112 / 0.096

  wm
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 2.56 1.21 – 3.91 <0.001
condition [1] 0.09 -0.56 – 0.75 0.774
lmx 0.52 0.18 – 0.85 0.003
Observations 57
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.246 / 0.219

Burnout

(2-items; adapted from Maslach et al., 1997)
I would feel worn out at the end of the working day.
I would feel emotionally drained from my work.

  burn
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 3.82 3.31 – 4.33 <0.001
condition [1] -0.98 -1.69 – -0.26 0.009
Observations 57
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.119 / 0.103

  burn
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 6.07 4.28 – 7.86 <0.001
condition [1] -0.27 -1.14 – 0.60 0.541
lmx -0.58 -1.02 – -0.14 0.011
Observations 57
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.219 / 0.190

Organizational Commitment

2-items; adapted from Grant et al., 2008 I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization I would feel like this organization’s problems are my own

  oc
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 3.54 3.17 – 3.90 <0.001
condition [1] 1.21 0.69 – 1.72 <0.001
Observations 57
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.288 / 0.275

  oc
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 2.36 1.05 – 3.68 0.001
condition [1] 0.84 0.20 – 1.48 0.011
lmx 0.30 -0.02 – 0.63 0.068
Observations 57
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.331 / 0.306

SR effect holds when controlled for LMX

Job Satisfaction

(3-items; adapted from Brayfield & Rothe, 1951; Koopman et al., 2016) I would feel fairly satisfied with my job. I would feel enthusiastic about my work. I would find real enjoyment in my work.

  js
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 4.15 3.82 – 4.49 <0.001
condition [1] 1.52 1.06 – 1.99 <0.001
Observations 57
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.439 / 0.429

  js
Predictors Estimates CI p
(Intercept) 2.41 1.29 – 3.54 <0.001
condition [1] 0.97 0.43 – 1.52 0.001
lmx 0.45 0.17 – 0.73 0.002
Observations 57
R2 / R2 adjusted 0.530 / 0.512

SR effect holds when controlled for LMX


Mediation by WM

SR –> WM –> BURN

## Running nonparametric bootstrap
Mediation of shared reality (srg) and burnout (burn) through work meaning (wm).
Effect B 95% CI p
Indirect effect (ACME) 0.089 [-0.02, 0.241] = 0.134
Direct effect (ADE) -0.463 [-0.666, -0.242] < .001
Total effect -0.374 [-0.556, -0.17] < .001
Proportion mediated -0.238 [-1, 0.046] = 0.134

WM does not mediate SR and Burn
SR –> WM –> OC

## Running nonparametric bootstrap
Mediation of shared reality (srg) and organizational commitment (oc) through work meaning (wm).
Effect B 95% CI p
Indirect effect (ACME) 0.067 [-0.005, 0.144] = 0.070
Direct effect (ADE) 0.313 [0.183, 0.449] < .001
Total effect 0.380 [0.235, 0.515] < .001
Proportion mediated 0.177 [-0.012, 0.375] = 0.070

WM does not mediate SR and OC
SR –> WM –> JS

## Running nonparametric bootstrap
Mediation of shared reality (srg) and job satisfaction (js) through work meaning (wm).
Effect B 95% CI p
Indirect effect (ACME) 0.088 [0.022, 0.158] = 0.010
Direct effect (ADE) 0.367 [0.226, 0.509] < .001
Total effect 0.455 [0.325, 0.579] < .001
Proportion mediated 0.194 [0.049, 0.377] = 0.010

WM mediates SR and JS


Mediation by LMX

SR –> LMX –> BURN

## Running nonparametric bootstrap
Mediation of shared reality (srg) and burnout (burn) through LMX.
Effect B 95% CI p
Indirect effect (ACME) -0.160 [-0.391, 0.083] = 0.172
Direct effect (ADE) -0.214 [-0.496, 0.061] = 0.140
Total effect -0.374 [-0.564, -0.176] < .001
Proportion mediated 0.427 [-0.235, 1.238] = 0.172

LMX does not mediate SR and Burn

SR –> LMX –> OC

## Running nonparametric bootstrap
Mediation of shared reality (srg) and organizational commitment (oc) through LMX.
Effect B 95% CI p
Indirect effect (ACME) 0.041 [-0.152, 0.239] = 0.738
Direct effect (ADE) 0.340 [0.098, 0.584] = 0.002
Total effect 0.380 [0.229, 0.508] < .001
Proportion mediated 0.107 [-0.455, 0.675] = 0.738

LMX does not mediate SR and OC

SR –> LMX –> JS

## Running nonparametric bootstrap
Mediation of shared reality (srg) and job satisfaction (js) through LMX.
Effect B 95% CI p
Indirect effect (ACME) 0.136 [-0.083, 0.343] = 0.214
Direct effect (ADE) 0.319 [0.089, 0.574] = 0.014
Total effect 0.455 [0.326, 0.574] < .001
Proportion mediated 0.299 [-0.183, 0.781] = 0.214

LMX does not mediate SR and JS