Browsing by Subject "Counterproductive work behavior"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior: Understanding their nature and antecedents through familial, longitudinal, and concurrent data
    (2022-05) Anderson, Elise
    This dissertation includes a series of three studies designed to further illuminate the origins of nontask performance (i.e., counterproductive work behavior [CWB] and organizational citizenship behavior [OCB]) using individual differences and behavioral genetics perspectives: Familial resemblance, maladaptive individual differences, and longitudinal modeling of prosocial and disinhibited behaviors and attitudes. Study 1 examined familial resemblance in CWB and OCB among familial dyads (i.e., twins, non-twin siblings, parents-offspring, and couples). Biometric analyses were used to estimate the degree to which preexisting individual differences (i.e., genetic variability) and the environment (i.e., environmentality) accounted for variation in nontask performance. Analyses revealed that that CWB was more heritable (a2 = .39) than OCB (a2 = .22). Spouse/partner similarity in couples was used to examine whether spousal influence was a source of non-work, environmental variance identified in CWB and OCB. However, results suggested that spousal influence on nontask performance is limited. In Study 2, we explored maladaptive personality traits as possible individual differences accounting for unique variance beyond normative personality traits, which have historically been the focus in research examining personality and nontask performance. We used the 25 facet traits of the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5), alongside the lower-order traits from the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire, a measure of normative personality traits. CWB had small to moderate, significant relationships with each of the maladaptive traits, while correlations between the maladaptive traits and OCB ranged from negligible to negative and moderate. While the normative traits accounted for similar amounts of variance in both CWB and OCB, maladaptive traits accounted for an additional 10.4% and 5.7% of variance over and above the normative traits and demographic factors. Finally, Study 3 prospectively examined the relationship between adolescent prosociality, adolescent disinhibition, and nontask performance to further illuminate the nomological net of prosocial and disinhibited behaviors. Structural equation modeling revealed that adolescent disinhibition was moderately and positively associated with CWB (r =.29) but negligibly associated with OCB (r = -.07), while adolescent prosociality was positively and moderately associated with OCB (r = .25). Contrary to expectation, adolescent proscoiality was negatively and moderately associated with CWB (r = -.27). In combination, these three studies provide deeper insight into the origins of nontask performance by describing the degree to which differences in CWB and OCB are genetically influenced, exploring if maladaptive traits account for some of the observed differences in nontask performance, and finally by placing CWB and OCB in a larger scope of prosocial and disinhibited behaviors.