IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i5p2932-d762846.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Power Distance Belief and Workplace Communication: The Mediating Role of Fear of Authority

Author

Listed:
  • Yuwan Dai

    (Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

  • Hao Li

    (Plateau Brain Science Research Center, Tibet University, Lhasa 850001, China)

  • Wenting Xie

    (School of Education, Tibet University, Lhasa 850001, China)

  • Tianyi Deng

    (Health Science Center, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

Abstract

Power distance is the degree of acceptance of unequal distribution of power in societies. In a high power distance context, the acceptance of inequality conflicts with the operation of modern organizations, which causes obstacles to workplace communication or even triggers workplace accidents due to ineffective communication. We conducted four studies ( N = 1063) to explore the relations between and mechanisms of power distance belief and workplace communication. In Study 1, the participants with high power distance belief had ineffective workplace communication—specifically ineffective communication with superiors—but no difference in communication with subordinates and colleagues. We further focused on the mechanism underlying the relationship between power distance belief and communication with superiors. A questionnaire study (Study 2) was conducted in three stages over a three-month period, and an experimental study (Study 3) indicated that fear of authority mediated the negative effect of high power distance on communication with superiors. A cross-culture study (Study 4) re-tested the hypotheses among Chinese and U.S. participants. This research provides insight into the mechanisms that explain the relationship between power distance belief and workplace communication, indicating that fear of authority is significant. Organizations should pay attention to power distance belief and fear of authority, as they may lead to workplace accidents due to communication disasters.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuwan Dai & Hao Li & Wenting Xie & Tianyi Deng, 2022. "Power Distance Belief and Workplace Communication: The Mediating Role of Fear of Authority," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-14, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:5:p:2932-:d:762846
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/5/2932/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/5/2932/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shu Z. Schiller & Jiaying Cui, 2010. "Communication Openness in the Workplace: the Effects of Medium (F2F and IM) and Culture (U.S. and China)," Journal of Global Information Technology Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 37-75, April.
    2. Karakostas, Alexandros & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2016. "Compliance and the power of authority," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 67-80.
    3. Mary Yoko Brannen & Rebecca Piekkari & Susanne Tietze, 2014. "The multifaceted role of language in international business: Unpacking the forms, functions and features of a critical challenge to MNC theory and performance," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 45(5), pages 495-507, June.
    4. Karen Page Winterich & Yinlong Zhang, 2014. "Accepting Inequality Deters Responsibility: How Power Distance Decreases Charitable Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(2), pages 274-293.
    5. Sook Shuen Yeong & Abdul Wahab Shah Rollah, 2016. "The Mediating Effect of Safety Culture on Safety Communication and Human Factor Accident at the Workplace," Asian Social Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(12), pages 127-127, December.
    6. Linn Van Dyne & Soon Ang & Isabel C. Botero, 2003. "Conceptualizing Employee Silence and Employee Voice as Multidimensional Constructs," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(6), pages 1359-1392, September.
    7. Cornelissen, J. P. & Durand, Rodolphe & Fiss, Peer C. & Lammers, John & Vaara, Eero, 2015. "Putting Communication Front and Center in Institutional Theory and Analysis," HEC Research Papers Series 1168, HEC Paris.
    8. Ting Wang & Xue Wang & Tonglin Jiang & Shiyao Wang & Zhansheng Chen, 2021. "Under the Threat of an Epidemic: People with Higher Subjective Socioeconomic Status Show More Unethical Behaviors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-14, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. König, Andreas & Fehn, Angela & Puck, Jonas & Graf-Vlachy, Lorenz, 2017. "Primary or complex? Towards a theory of metaphorical strategy communication in MNCs," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 270-285.
    2. Alaa Chaabo, 2022. "Semantic Multiplicity : How Lexical Ambiguity Elicit Imperfect Organizational Discourse Sustaining Category Ambiguity In Case of NPD," Post-Print hal-04090505, HAL.
    3. James R. Detert & Linda K. Treviño, 2010. "Speaking Up to Higher-Ups: How Supervisors and Skip-Level Leaders Influence Employee Voice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 249-270, February.
    4. Florian M. Artinger & Sabrina Artinger & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2019. "C. Y. A.: frequency and causes of defensive decisions in public administration," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 9-25, April.
    5. Leif Brändle & Helen Signer & Andreas Kuckertz, 2023. "Socioeconomic status and entrepreneurial networking responses to the COVID-19 crisis," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(1), pages 111-147, January.
    6. Hossfeld, Heiko, 2018. "Legitimation and institutionalization of managerial practices. The role of organizational rhetoric," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 9-21.
    7. Li, Chang-Jun & Li, Fuli & Chen, Tingting & Michael Crant, J., 2022. "Proactive personality and promotability: Mediating roles of promotive and prohibitive voice and moderating roles of organizational politics and leader-member exchange," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 253-267.
    8. Liu, Yipeng & Meyer, Klaus E., 2020. "Boundary spanners, HRM practices, and reverse knowledge transfer: The case of Chinese cross-border acquisitions," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(2).
    9. Tilahun Kidane Diko & Shabnam Saxena, 2023. "Antecedents and outcome of employee engagement: Empirical study of Ethiopian public higher education institutions," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(8), pages 1-30, August.
    10. Bazart, Cécile & Lefebvre, Mathieu & Rosaz, Julie, 2022. "Promoting socially desirable behaviors through persuasion and commitment: Experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    11. Fatas, Enrique & Nosenzo, Daniele & Sefton, Martin & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2021. "A self-funding reward mechanism for tax compliance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    12. Xue Tong Dong & Yang Woon Chung & Jeong Kwon Yun, 2023. "The Mediating Effects of Anxiety and Happiness and the Moderating Effect of Social Network Services for Employee Silence and Psychological Withdrawal Behavior," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, November.
    13. Uhrenholdt Madsen, Christian & Boch Waldorff, Susanne, 2019. "Between advocacy, compliance and commitment: A multilevel analysis of institutional logics in work environment management," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 12-25.
    14. David Marsden, 2010. "Individual Voice in Employment Relationships: A Comparison Under Different Collective Voice Regimes," CEP Discussion Papers dp1006, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    15. Dante I. Leyva-de la Hiz & J. Alberto Aragon-Correa & Andrew G. Earle, 2022. "Innovating for Good in Opportunistic Contexts: The Case for Firms’ Environmental Divergence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(4), pages 705-721, April.
    16. Xiaochuan Song, 2022. "Investigating Employees’ Responses to Abusive Supervision," Merits, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-20, November.
    17. Wang, Jessie J. & Lalwani, Ashok K. & DelVecchio, Devon, 2022. "The Impact of Power Distance Belief on Consumers' Brand Preferences," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 804-823.
    18. Jun Huang & Gengxuan Guo & Dingping Tang & Tianyuan Liu & Liang Tan, 2019. "An Eye for an Eye? Third Parties’ Silence Reactions to Peer Abusive Supervision: The Mediating Role of Workplace Anxiety, and the Moderating Role of Core Self-Evaluation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-18, December.
    19. Simon, Mark & Stanton, Steven J. & Townsend, Janell D. & Kim, John, 2019. "A multi-method study of social ties and crowdfunding success: Opening the black box to get the cash inside," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 206-214.
    20. Andrew Crane & Sarah Glozer, 2016. "Researching Corporate Social Responsibility Communication: Themes, Opportunities and Challenges," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(7), pages 1223-1252, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:5:p:2932-:d:762846. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.