Employee “Free” Speech vs. Organizational Censorship on Social Media: Balancing the Tension Between Free Expression and Safeguards to Foster Psychological Safety

References

• Al-Kire RL, Miller CA, Pasek MH, Perry SL, Wilkins CL (2024) White by another name? Can anti-Christian bias claims serve as a racial dog whistle? Psych. Sci. 35(4):415–434.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amengual M, Bartley T (2022) Global markets, corporate assurances, and the legitimacy of state intervention: Perceptions of distant labor and environmental problems. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 87(3):383–414.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amira K, Wright JC, Goya-Tocchetto D (2021) In-group love versus out-group hate: Which is more important to partisans and when? Political Behav. 43(2):473–494.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashforth BE, Reingen PH (2014) Functions of dysfunction: Managing the dynamics of an organizational duality in a natural food cooperative. Admin. Sci. Quart. 59(3):474–516.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashforth BE, Kreiner GE, Fugate M (2000) All in a day’s work: Boundaries and micro role transitions. Acad. Management Rev. 25(3):472–491.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Astor M (2019) How the politically unthinkable can become mainstream. New York Times (February 26), https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/26/us/politics/overton-window-democrats.html.Google Scholar
• Auerbach AM, Thachil T (2018) How clients select brokers: Competition and choice in India’s slums. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 112(4):775–791.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Babu N, De Roeck K, Raineri N (2020) Hypocritical organizations: Implications for employee social responsibility. J. Bus. Res. 114:376–384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Banghart S, Etter M, Stohl C (2018) Organizational boundary regulation through social media policies. Management Comm. Quart. 32(3):337–373.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bansak K, Hainmueller J, Hangartner D (2016) How economic, humanitarian, and religious concerns shape European attitudes toward asylum seekers. Science 354(6309):217–222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bansak K, Hainmueller J, Hopkins DJ, Yamamoto T (2018) The number of choice tasks and survey satisficing in conjoint experiments. Political Anal. 26(1):112–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bansak K, Hainmueller J, Hopkins DJ, Yamamoto T (2021) Conjoint survey experiments. Green DP, Druckman JN, eds. Advances in Experimental Political Science (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 19–41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barden J, Rucker DD, Petty RE (2005) “Saying one thing and doing another”: Examining the impact of event order on hypocrisy judgments of others. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 31(11):1463–1474.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Behrend TS, Ravid DM, Thapa S (2024) Implications of social media for a changing work landscape. Annual Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 11(1):337–361.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bilewicz M, Soral W, Marchlewska M, Winiewski M (2017) When authoritarians confront prejudice. Differential effects of SDO and RWA on support for hate-speech prohibition. Political Psych. 38(1):87–99.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boone R (2023) Experts say attacks on free speech are rising across the US. AP News. Retrieved March 10, 2024, https://apnews.com/article/first-amendment-free-speech-censorship-mccarthyism-815865bafa52bb821400be15fdf76119.Google Scholar
• Bor A, Jørgensen F, Petersen MB (2023) Discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated people during the pandemic. Nature 613(7945):704–711.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brehm JW (1966) A Theory of Psychological Reactance (Academic Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Brehm SS, Brehm JW (2013) Psychological Reactance: A Theory of Freedom and Control (Academic Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Brenan M (2024) Same-sex relations, marriage still supported by most in U.S. Gallup.com. Retrieved September 1, https://news.gallup.com/poll/646202/sex-relations-marriage-supported.aspx.Google Scholar
• Burnett L, Aguinis H (2024) How to prevent and minimize DEI backfire. Bus. Horizons 67(2):173–182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carlos WC, Lewis BW (2018) Strategic silence: Withholding certification status as a hypocrisy avoidance tactic. Admin. Sci. Quart. 63(1):130–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cha SE, Edmondson AC (2006) When values backfire: Leadership, attribution, and disenchantment in a values-driven organization. Leadership Quart. 17(1):57–78.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cho A (2018) Default publicness: Queer youth of color, social media, and being outed by the machine. New Media Soc. 20(9):3183–3200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chong D, Citrin J, Levy M (2024) The realignment of political tolerance in the United States. Perspect. Politics 22(1):131–152.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Collins NL, Miller LC (1994) Self-disclosure and liking: A meta-analytic review. Psych. Bull. 116(3):457–475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cortina LM, Kabat-Farr D, Magley VJ, Nelson K (2017) Researching rudeness: The past, present, and future of the science of incivility. J. Occupational Health Psych. 22(3):299–313.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Costello M, Hawdon J, Ratliff T, Grantham T (2016) Who views online extremism? Individual attributes leading to exposure. Comput. Human Behav. 63:311–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coutifaris CGV, Grant AM (2021) Taking your team behind the curtain: The effects of leader feedback-sharing and feedback-seeking on team psychological safety. Organ. Sci. 33(4):1574–1598.Link, Google Scholar
• Crandall CS, Stangor C (2005) Conformity and prejudice. Dovidio JF, Glick P, Rudman LA, eds. On the Nature of Prejudice (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Bognor Regis, UK), 293–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Creary SJ, Locke K (2022) Breaking the cycle of overwork and recuperation: Altering somatic engagement across boundaries. Organ. Sci. 33(3):873–900.Link, Google Scholar
• Daniller A (2021) Majorities of Americans see at least some discrimination against Black, Hispanic and Asian people in the U.S. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Dell Technologies (2023) Global social media policy. Dell Technologies, Round Rock, TX.Google Scholar
• Dwivedi P, Gee IH, Withers MC, Boivie S (2023) No reason to leave: The effects of CEO diversity-valuing behavior on psychological safety and turnover for female executives. J. Appl. Psych. 108(7):1262–1276.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson A (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):350–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC (1996) Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 32(1):5–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC (2003) Speaking up in the operating room: How team leaders promote learning in interdisciplinary action teams. J. Management Stud. 40(6):1419–1452.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC (2018) The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth, 1st ed. (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ).Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC, Bransby DP (2023) Psychological safety comes of age: Observed themes in an established literature. Annual Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 10(1):55–78.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC, Lei Z (2014) Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 1(1):23–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elliot AJ, Devine PG (1994) On the motivational nature of cognitive dissonance: Dissonance as psychological discomfort. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 67(3):382–394.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elsamra M (2024) Delta removes an employee, changes its uniform policy after backlash over social media post perceived to be anti-Palestinian. CNN. Retrieved November 12, https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/12/us/delta-employee-social-post-palestinian-reaj/index.html.Google Scholar
• Festinger L (1962) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Google Scholar
• Flynn E, Leslie LM (2023) Progressive or pressuring? The signaling effects of egg freezing coverage and other work–life policies. J. Appl. Psych. 108(1):1–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Forbes Human Resources Council (2017) Council post: Why your business needs a social media policy and eight things it should cover. Forbes (May 25), https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2017/05/25/why-your-business-needs-a-social-media-policy-and-eight-things-it-should-cover/.Google Scholar
• Frazier ML, Fainshmidt S, Klinger RL, Pezeshkan A, Vracheva V (2017) Psychological safety: A meta‐analytic review and extension. Personnel Psych. 70(1):113–165.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frey E, Adams GS, Pfeffer J, Belmi P (2023) What we (do not) know about punishment across organizational boundaries. J. Management 49(1):196–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibson K (2023) Growing number of workers lose their jobs for antisemitic social media posts. CBS News. Retrieved November 12, 2024, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/citigroup-fires-banker-for-antisemitic-social-media-post/.Google Scholar
• Goncalo JA, Chatman JA, Duguid MM, Kennedy JA (2015) Creativity from constraint? How the political correctness norm influences creativity in mixed-sex work groups. Admin. Sci. Quart. 60(1):1–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graetz F, Smith ACT (2008) The role of dualities in arbitrating continuity and change in forms of organizing. Internat. J. Management Rev. 10(3):265–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graetz F, Smith ACT (2009) Duality theory and organizing forms in change management. J. Change Management 9(1):9–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graham J, Meindl P, Koleva S, Iyer R, Johnson KM (2015) When values and behavior conflict: Moral pluralism and intrapersonal moral hypocrisy. Soc. Personality Psych. Compass 9(3):158–170.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graupmann V, Jonas E, Meier E, Hawelka S, Aichhorn M (2012) Reactance, the self, and its group: When threats to freedom come from the ingroup versus the outgroup. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 42(2):164–173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Graves P (2021) Ask an expert: Online behavior. SHRM, Alexandria, VA.Google Scholar
• Gray K, Kubin E (2024) Victimhood: The most powerful force in morality and politics. Gawronski B, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 70 (Academic Press, New York), 137–220.Google Scholar
• Greenbaum RL, Mawritz MB, Piccolo RF (2015) When leaders fail to “walk the talk”: Supervisor undermining and perceptions of leader hypocrisy. J. Management 41(3):929–956.Google Scholar
• Hainmueller J, Hangartner D, Yamamoto T (2015) Validating vignette and conjoint survey experiments against real-world behavior. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112(8):2395–2400.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Halbesleben JRB, Leroy H, Dierynck B, Simons T, Savage GT, McCaughey D, Leon MR (2013) Living up to safety values in health care: The effect of leader behavioral integrity on occupational safety. J. Occupational Health Psych. 18(4):395–405.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harvey JF, Johnson KJ, Roloff KS, Edmondson AC (2019) From orientation to behavior: The interplay between learning orientation, open-mindedness, and psychological safety in team learning. Human Relations 72(11):1726–1751.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hawkins CB, Nosek BA (2012) Motivated independence? Implicit party identity predicts political judgments among self-proclaimed independents. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 38(11):1437–1452.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hebl M, Cheng SK, Ng LC (2020) Modern discrimination in organizations. Annual Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 7(1):57–82.Google Scholar
• Hersel MC, Helmuth CA, Zorn ML, Shropshire C, Ridge JW (2019) The corrective actions organizations pursue following misconduct: A review and research agenda. Acad. Management Ann. 13(2):547–585.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hidy K (2020) Social media policies, corporate censorship and the right to be forgiven: A proposed framework for free expression in an era of employer social media monitoring. Univ. Pennsylvania J. Bus. Law 22(2):346–385.Google Scholar
• Horiuchi Y, Markovich Z, Yamamoto T (2022) Does conjoint analysis mitigate social desirability bias? Political Anal. 30(4):535–549.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iyengar S, Lelkes Y, Levendusky M, Malhotra N, Westwood SJ (2019) The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annual Rev. Political Sci. 22(1):129–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang Z, Hu X, Wang Z, Jiang X (2019) Knowledge hiding as a barrier to thriving: The mediating role of psychological safety and moderating role of organizational cynicism. J. Organ. Behav. 40(7):800–818.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson C (2024) Supreme Court justices appear skeptical of Texas and Florida social media laws. NPR (February 26), https://www.npr.org/2024/02/26/1233506273/supreme-court-social-media-laws.Google Scholar
• Jost JT (2021) Left and Right: The Psychological Significance of a Political Distinction (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Jost JT, Federico CM, Napier JL (2009) Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Rev. Psych. 60(1):307–337.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahn WA (1990) Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Acad. Management J. 33(4):692–724.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karunakaran A, Orlikowski WJ, Scott SV (2022) Crowd-based accountability: Examining how social media commentary reconfigures organizational accountability. Organ. Sci. 33(1):170–193.Link, Google Scholar
• Keith BE, Magleby DB, Nelson CJ, Orr E, Westlye MC, Wolfinger RE (1992) The Myth of the Independent Voter (University of California Press, Berkeley).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knight Foundation (2020) The 100 Million Project: The Untold Story of American Non-voters (Knight Foundation, Miami).Google Scholar
• Knol MJ, Pestman WR, Grobbee DE (2011) The (mis)use of overlap of confidence intervals to assess effect modification. Eur. J. Epidemiology 26(4):253–254.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kossek EE, Lautsch BA (2012) Work–family boundary management styles in organizations: A cross-level model. Organ. Psych. Rev. 2(2):152–171.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kozyreva A, Herzog SM, Lewandowsky S, Hertwig R, Lorenz-Spreen P, Leiser M, Reifler J (2023) Resolving content moderation dilemmas between free speech and harmful misinformation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 120(7):e2210666120.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kraatz MS, Block ES (2008) Organizational implications of institutional pluralism. Greenwood R, Oliver C, Suddaby R, Sahlin K, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (SAGE Publications Ltd, London), 243–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lauriano LA, Coacci T (2023) Losing control: The uncertain management of concealable stigmas when work and social media collide. Acad. Management J. 66(1):222–247.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leigh A, Melwani S (2022) “Am I next?” The spillover effects of mega-threats on avoidant behaviors at work. Acad. Management J. 65(3):720–748.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leroy H, Dierynck B, Anseel F, Simons T, Halbesleben JRB, McCaughey D, Savage GT, Sels L (2012) Behavioral integrity for safety, priority of safety, psychological safety, and patient safety: A team-level study. J. Appl. Psych. 97(6):1273–1281.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levendusky M (2009) The Partisan Sort: How Liberals Became Democrats and Conservatives Became Republicans (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levine SS, Schilke O, Kacperczyk O, Zucker LG (2023) Primer for experimental methods in organization theory. Organ. Sci. 34(6):1997–2025.Link, Google Scholar
• Lewis MW (2000) Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Acad. Management Rev. 25(4):760–776.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li AH, Noland ES, Monteith MJ (2024) Following prejudiced behavior, confrontation restores local anti-bias social norms. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull., ePub ahead of print March 4, https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672241229006.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liu W, Song Z, Li X, Liao Z (2017) Why and when leaders’ affective states influence employee upward voice. Acad. Management J. 60(1):238–263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lyon D (2018) The Culture of Surveillance: Watching as a Way of Life, 1st ed. (Polity, Cambridge, UK).Google Scholar
• Mason L (2018) Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• McFarland LA, Ployhart RE (2015) Social media: A contextual framework to guide research and practice. J. Appl. Psych. 100(6):1653–1677.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell A, Walker M (2021) More Americans now say government should take steps to restrict false information online than in 2018. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Mönke FW, Lievens F, Hess U, Schäpers P (2024) Politics speak louder than skills: Political similarity effects in hireability judgments in multiparty contexts and the role of political interest. J. Appl. Psych. 109(1):1–12.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mummolo J, Peterson E (2019) Demand effects in survey experiments: An empirical assessment. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 113(2):517–529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nalick M, Kuban S, Hill AD, Ridge JW (2020) Too hot to handle and too valuable to drop: An expanded conceptualization of firms’ reactions to exchange partner misconduct. Acad. Management J. 63(6):1976–2003.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Neeley TB, Leonardi PM (2018) Enacting knowledge strategy through social media: Passable trust and the paradox of nonwork interactions. Strategic Management J. 39(3):922–946.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Newman A, Donohue R, Eva N (2017) Psychological safety: A systematic review of the literature. Human Resource Management Rev. 27(3):521–535.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nippert-Eng C (1996) Calendars and keys: The classification of “home” and “work.” Sociol. Forum 11(3):563–582.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Norris P (2023) Cancel culture: Myth or reality? Political Stud. 71(1):145–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W, Wohlgezogen F (2010) Attention and control. Sitkin S, Cardinal L, Bijlsma-Frankema KM, eds. Organizational Control: New Directions in Theory and Research (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 191–221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ollier-Malaterre A, Jacobs JA, Rothbard NP (2019) Technology, work, and family: Digital cultural capital and boundary management. Annual Rev. Sociol. 45(1):425–447.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ollier-Malaterre A, Rothbard NP, Berg JM (2013) When worlds collide in cyberspace: How boundary work in online social networks impacts professional relationships. Acad. Management Rev. 38(4):645–669.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Olmsted K, Lampe C, Ellison NB (2016) Social media and the workplace. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• O’Reilly J, Aquino K (2011) A model of third parties’ morally motivated responses to mistreatment in organizations. Acad. Management Rev. 36(3):526–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ortutay B (2025) Meta rolls back hate speech rules as Zuckerberg cites “recent elections” as a catalyst. AP News. Retrieved March 1, https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-hate-speech-trump-immigrant-transgender-41191638cd7c720b950c05f9395a2b49.Google Scholar
• Ouchi WG, Maguire MA (1975) Organizational control: Two functions. Admin. Sci. Quart. 20(4):559–569.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paluck EL, Porat R, Clark CS, Green DP (2021) Prejudice reduction: Progress and challenges. Annual. Rev. Psych. 72(1):533–560.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parker K, Horowitz JM, Brown A (2022) Americans’ complex views on gender identity and transgender issues. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Patil SV, Bernstein ES (2022) Uncovering the mitigating psychological response to monitoring technologies: Police body cameras not only constrain but also depolarize. Organ. Sci. 33(2):541–570.Link, Google Scholar
• Perlow LA (1998) Boundary control: The social ordering of work and family time in a high-tech corporation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 43(2):328–357.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center (2014) The party of nonvoters. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Pillemer J, Rothbard NP (2018) Friends without benefits: Understanding the dark sides of workplace friendship. Acad. Management Rev. 43(4):635–660.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Posner BZ (2010) Another look at the impact of personal and organizational values congruency. J. Bus. Ethics 97(4):535–541.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Posner BZ, Kouzes JM, Schmidt WH (1985) Shared values make a difference: An empirical test of corporate culture. Human Resource Management 24(3):293–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pradel F, Zilinsky J, Kosmidis S, Theocharis Y (2024) Toxic speech and limited demand for content moderation on social media. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 118(4):1895–1912.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pratto F, Sidanius J, Stallworth LM, Malle BF (1994) Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 67(4):741–763.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Putnam LL, Fairhurst GT, Banghart S (2016) Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. Acad. Management Ann. 10(1):65–171.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Quinn RE, Cameron KS, eds. (1988) Paradox and Transformation: Toward a Theory of Change in Organization and Management (Ballinger Publishing Co., Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Ramarajan L, Reid E (2013) Shattering the myth of separate worlds: Negotiating nonwork identities at work. Acad. Management Rev. 38(4):621–644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rego A, Melo AI, Bluhm DJ, Pina e Cunha M, Reis Júnior D (2021) Leader-expressed humility predicting team psychological safety: A personality dynamics lens. J. Bus. Ethics 174(3):669–686.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rheinhardt A, Poskanzer EJ, Briscoe F (2024) The career consequences of workplace protest participation: Theory and evidence from the NFL “Take a knee” movement. Organ. Sci. 35(3):888–910.Link, Google Scholar
• Roccapriore AY, Pollock TG (2023) I don’t need a degree, I’ve got abs: Influencer warmth and competence, communication mode, and stakeholder engagement on social media. Acad. Management J. 66(3):979–1006.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ronson J (2016) So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed (Riverhead Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Rosen CC, Koopman J, Gabriel AS, Lee YE, Ezerins M, Roth PL (2024) Hidden consequences of political discourse at work: How and why ambient political conversations impact employee outcomes. J. Appl. Psych. 109(6):795–810.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenberg BD, Siegel JT (2018) A 50-year review of psychological reactance theory: Do not read this article. Motivation Sci. 4(4):281–300.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenblum M, Schroeder J, Gino F (2020) Tell it like it is: When politically incorrect language promotes authenticity. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 119(1):75–103.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosette AS, Carton AM, Bowes-Sperry L, Hewlin PF (2013) Why do racial slurs remain prevalent in the workplace? Integrating theory on intergroup behavior. Organ. Sci. 24(5):1402–1421.Link, Google Scholar
• Roth PL, Bobko P, Ellingson JE, Thatcher JB, Matthews KD, Goldberg CB (2020) Political affiliation and employment screening decisions: The role of similarity and identification processes. J. Appl. Psych. 105(5):472–486.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roth PL, Bobko P, Shan G, Roth RW, Ferrise E, Thatcher JB (2024) Doxing, political affiliation, and type of information: Effects on suspicion, perceived similarity, and hiring-related judgments. J. Appl. Psych. 109(5):730–754.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothbard NP, Ollier-Malaterre A (2016) Boundary management. Allen TD, Eby LT, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Work and Family (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 109–122.Google Scholar
• Rothbard NP, Phillips KW, Dumas TL (2005) Managing multiple roles: Work-family policies and individuals’ desires for segmentation. Organ. Sci. 16(3):243–258.Link, Google Scholar
• Rothbard NP, Ramarajan L, Ollier-Malaterre A, Lee SS (2022) OMG! My boss just friended me: How evaluations of colleagues’ disclosure, gender, and rank shape personal/professional boundary blurring online. Acad. Management J. 65(1):35–65.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schad J, Lewis MW, Raisch S, Smith WK (2016) Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. Acad. Management Ann. 10(1):5–64.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schein C, Gray K (2018) The theory of dyadic morality: Reinventing moral judgment by redefining harm. Personality Soc. Psych. Rev. 22(1):32–70.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schlosser AE (2020) Self-disclosure versus self-presentation on social media. Current Opinion Psych. 31:1–6.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Silver L, Fetterolf J, Connaughton A (2021) Diversity and division in advanced economies. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Simons T (2002) Behavioral integrity: The perceived alignment between managers’ words and deeds as a research focus. Organ. Sci. 13(1):18–35.Link, Google Scholar
• Singh B, Winkel DE, Selvarajan TT (2013) Managing diversity at work: Does psychological safety hold the key to racial differences in employee performance? J. Occupational Organ. Psych. 86(2):242–263.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith WK, Lewis MW (2011) Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Acad. Management Rev. 36(2):381–403.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Solomon BC, Hall MEK (2023) When (non) differences make a difference: The roles of demographic diversity and ideological homogeneity in overcoming ideologically biased decision making. Organ. Sci. 34(5):1820–1838.Link, Google Scholar
• Solomon BC, Hall MEK, Hemmen A, Druckman JN (2024) Illusory interparty disagreement: Partisans agree on what hate speech to censor but do not know it. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 121(39):e2402428121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stanko TL, Beckman CM (2015) Watching you watching me: Boundary control and capturing attention in the context of ubiquitous technology use. Acad. Management J. 58(3):712–738.Crossref, Google Scholar
• St. Aubin C, Liedke J (2023) Most Americans favor restrictions on false information, violent content online. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Stohl C, Etter M, Banghart S, Woo DJ (2017) Social media policies: Implications for contemporary notions of corporate social responsibility. J. Bus. Ethics 142(3):413–436.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Swigart KL, Anantharaman A, Williamson JA, Grandey AA (2020) Working while liberal/conservative: A review of political ideology in organizations. J. Management 46(6):1063–1091.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thomas LT, Ganster DC (1995) Impact of family-supportive work variables on work-family conflict and strain: A control perspective. J. Appl. Psych. 80(1):6–15.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thompson JA, Bunderson JS (2003) Violations of principle: Ideological currency in the psychological contract. Acad. Management Rev. 28(4):571–586.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Torrez B, Hollie L, Richeson JA, Kraus MW (2024) The misperception of organizational racial progress toward diversity, equity, and inclusion. Amer. Psych. 79(4):581–592.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tu Y, Lu X, Choi JN, Guo W (2019) Ethical leadership and team-level creativity: Mediation of psychological safety climate and moderation of supervisor support for creativity. J. Bus. Ethics 159:551–565.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Turner SF, Cardinal LB, Burton RM (2017) Research design for mixed methods: A triangulation-based framework and roadmap. Organ. Res. Methods 20(2):243–267.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Villatoro D, Andrighetto G, Brandts J, Nardin LG, Sabater-Mir J, Conte R (2014) The norm-signaling effects of group punishment: Combining agent-based simulation and laboratory experiments. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 32(3):334–353.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wade JT, Roth PL, Thatcher JB, Dinger M (2020) Social media and selection: Political issue similarity, liking, and the moderating effect of social media platform. MIS Quart. 44(3):1301–1357.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wagner T, Korschun D, Troebs CC (2020) Deconstructing corporate hypocrisy: A delineation of its behavioral, moral, and attributional facets. J. Bus. Res. 114:385–394.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walther JB (2022) Social media and online hate. Current Opinion Psych. 45:101298.Crossref, Google Scholar
• White MH, Crandall CS (2017) Freedom of racist speech: Ego and expressive threats. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 113(3):413–429.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wike R, Schumacher S (2020) Democratic rights popular globally but commitment to them not always strong. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Womick J, Goya-Tocchetto D, Ochoa NR, Rebollar C, Kapsaskis K, Pratt S, Payne K, Vaisey S, Gray K (2024) Moral disagreement across politics is explained by different assumptions about who is most vulnerable to harm. Preprint, submitted March 26, https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/qsg7j.Google Scholar
• Wowak AJ, Busenbark JR (2024) Why do some conservative CEOs publicly support liberal causes? Organizational ideology, managerial discretion, and CEO sociopolitical activism. Organ. Sci. 35(4):1388–1408.Link, Google Scholar