IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0218184.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How psychology might alleviate violence in queues: Perceived future wait and perceived load moderate violence against service providers

Author

Listed:
  • Dorit Efrat-Treister
  • Arik Cheshin
  • Dana Harari
  • Anat Rafaeli
  • Shira Agasi
  • Hadar Moriah
  • Hanna Admi

Abstract

Introduction: Queues are inherent to service encounters, as it is not always possible to provide service to all clients at the exact moment they request service. Queues involve waiting for a service in a specific place that might also be crowded, they obstruct the client's’ goal of receiving service, and at times lead clients to mistreat service providers and in extreme cases even attack them violently. We show, in a hospital setting, that perceived predicted future wait and load can buffer the causes of violence towards service staff. Methods: We combine objective data on crowdedness, reports of violence, and durations of time people waited, with psychological measures of perceived load and perceived future wait, collected from 226 people in the Emergency Department (ED) of a large hospital. Visitors to the ED were recruited as they waited for service. They indicated their perceived load in the ED and their perceived remaining wait for service. This data was then triangulated with objective operational data regarding the actual number of people waiting for service (i.e., crowdedness) and objective data regarding staff calls to security to stop violent accounts. Results: We find that with increased crowdedness, there are more calls to security reporting violence. However, this relationship is moderated by two factors: when people perceive the future wait to be short and when they perceive the load on the system to be high. Moreover, a three-way interaction shows that crowdedness is associated with more incidents of violence, however high perceived load and low perceived future wait are associated with fewer violent incidents. Conclusions: This paper demonstrates the relationship between crowded queues and violence towards service staff, and suggests two psychological mechanisms for buffering such violence: reducing perceived future wait and elevating perceived load.

Suggested Citation

  • Dorit Efrat-Treister & Arik Cheshin & Dana Harari & Anat Rafaeli & Shira Agasi & Hadar Moriah & Hanna Admi, 2019. "How psychology might alleviate violence in queues: Perceived future wait and perceived load moderate violence against service providers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0218184
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0218184
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0218184&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0218184?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dezsîo, Linda & Hajdu, Gergely & Tobol, Yossef, 2024. "Unexpected waiting corrupts," Research Papers 26, EcoAustria – Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Linda Dezso & Gergely Hajdu & Yossef Tobol, 2024. "Unexpected Waiting Corrupts," Department of Economics Working Papers wuwp358, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Department of Economics.
    3. Hajdu, Gergely & Dezső, Linda & Tobol, Yossef, 2024. "Unexpected Waiting Corrupts," Department of Economics Working Paper Series 358, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    4. Lite J. Nartey & Witold J. Henisz & Sinziana Dorobantu, 2023. "Reciprocity in Firm–Stakeholder Dialog: Timeliness, Valence, Richness, and Topicality," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(2), pages 429-451, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0218184. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.