[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 100(2) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2015-08139-001). Table 3 contained formatting errors. Minus signs used to indicate negative statistical estimates within the table were inadvertently changed to m-dashes. All versions of this article have been corrected.] The purpose of this meta-analysis was to address unanswered questions regarding the associations between personality and workplace safety by (a) clarifying the magnitude and meaning of these associations with both broad and facet-level personality traits, (b) delineating how personality is associated with workplace safety, and (c) testing the relative importance of personality in comparison to perceptions of the social context of safety (i.e., safety climate) in predicting safety-related behavior. Our results revealed that whereas agreeableness and conscientiousness were negatively associated with unsafe behaviors, extraversion and neuroticism were positively associated with them. Of these traits, agreeableness accounted for the largest proportion of explained variance in safety-related behavior and openness to experience was unrelated. At the facet level, sensation seeking, altruism, anger, and impulsiveness were all meaningfully associated with safety-related behavior, though sensation seeking was the only facet that demonstrated a stronger relationship than its parent trait (i.e., extraversion). In addition, meta-analytic path modeling supported the theoretical expectation that personality's associations with accidents are mediated by safety-related behavior. Finally, although safety climate perceptions accounted for the majority of explained variance in safety-related behavior, personality traits (i.e., agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism) still accounted for a unique and substantive proportion of the explained variance. Taken together, these results substantiate the value of considering personality traits as key correlates of workplace safety.

Despite the growing number of meta-analyses published on the subject of workplace mistreatment and the expectation that women and racial minorities are mistreated more frequently than men and Whites, the degree of subgroup differences in perceived workplace mistreatment is unknown. To address this gap in the literature, we meta-analyzed the magnitude of sex and race differences in perceptions of workplace mistreatment (e.g., harassment, discrimination, bullying, incivility). Results indicate that women perceive more sex-based mistreatment (i.e., mistreatment that explicitly targets a person's sex) in the workplace than men (δ = .46; k = 43), whereas women and men report comparable perceptions of all other forms of mistreatment (δ = .02; k = 300). Similarly, although racial minorities perceive more race-based mistreatment (i.e., mistreatment that explicitly targets a person's race) in the workplace than Whites (δ = .71; k = 18), results indicate smaller race differences in all other forms of workplace mistreatment (δ = .10; k = 61). Results also indicate that sex and race differences have mostly decreased over time, although for some forms of mistreatment, subgroup differences have increased over time. We conclude by offering explanations for the observed subgroup differences in workplace mistreatment and outline directions for future research. (PsycINFO Database Record

Although transactional leadership is known to be the most common style of leadership in organizations, meta-analytic work has yet to fully uncover the relationship between transactional leadership and one of the most focal leadership outcomes: follower performance. Moreover, little is known about the mechanisms that explain why transactional leadership predicts follower performance. To address these gaps, the current article meta-analytically tests a model based on social exchange theory and self-determination theory in which transactional leadership is theorized to affect follower performance sequentially through leader–member exchange (LMX) and psychological empowerment. Specifically, we argue that although some leadership behaviors (e.g., contingent reward) may benefit performance via positive contributions to the leader–follower social exchange, some leadership behaviors (e.g., contingent reward) may simultaneously exhibit negative effects on performance via reduced empowerment. Our results demonstrate that transactional leadership displays both positive and negative indirect effects on follower performance. Furthermore, the pattern of these effects generalizes to two types of performance: task performance and contextual performance. These findings suggest that transactional leadership is a “double-edged sword” when predicting follower performance (e.g., contingent reward fosters LMX but hinders empowerment, whereas management by exception fosters empowerment but hinders LMX). We discuss how leaders can benefit from these findings, including modifying one’s delivery of transactional leadership approaches.

Unsafe work environments have clear consequences for both individuals and organizations. As such, an ever-expanding research base is providing a greater understanding of the factors that affect workplace safety across organizational levels. However, despite scientific advances, the workplace safety literature suffers from a lack of theoretical and empirical integration that makes it difficult for organizational scientists to gain a comprehensive sense of (a) what we currently know about workplace safety and (b) what we have yet to learn. This review addresses these shortcomings. First, the authors provide a formal definition of workplace safety and then create an integrated safety model (ISM) based on existing theory to summarize current theoretical expectations with regard to workplace safety. Second, the authors conduct a targeted review of the safety literature and compare extant empirical findings with the ISM. Finally, the authors use the results of this review to articulate gaps between theory and research and then make recommendations for both theoretical and empirical improvements to guide and integrate future workplace safety research.

No abstract