4.3 Article

Negative workplace gossip and knowledge hiding: roles of duty orientation and psychological entitlement

Journal

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14778238.2023.2297070

Keywords

Negative workplace gossip; duty orientation; knowledge hiding behaviours; psychological entitlement

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Drawing on social exchange theory, this study examined the impact of negative workplace gossip on knowledge hiding behaviors. The results showed that negative workplace gossip has a positive association with knowledge hiding behaviors, which is mediated by duty orientation. Additionally, psychological entitlement strengthens the negative influence of negative workplace gossip on duty orientation. However, the indirect effect of negative workplace gossip on knowledge hiding behaviors through duty orientation is stronger for employees with high psychological entitlement compared to those with low levels of psychological entitlement.
Drawing on the social exchange theory, this study examined the impact of negative workplace gossip on targets' knowledge hiding behaviours. We also examined the mediating role of duty orientation and the moderating role of psychological entitlement on the relationship between negative workplace gossip and knowledge hiding behaviours. We adopted a mixed-method research design involving a scenario experiment (Study 1) and a two-wave survey study (Study 2). The results showed that negative workplace gossip has a positive association with knowledge hiding behaviours and this relationship was mediated by duty orientation. In addition, psychological entitlement strengthens the negative influence of negative workplace gossip on duty orientation. However, the indirect effect of negative workplace gossip on knowledge hiding behaviours through duty orientation is stronger for employees with high psychological entitlement as compared to those having low levels of psychological entitlement.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available