Buffering the Effects of Betrayal

Couch, Laurie L.; Jones, Warren H.; Moore, Danny S.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-4773-0_26

Cited by 16 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous research on social psychology of relationships noted that clearly the most significant type of betrayals involve one's close and important relationships (e.g. friends, parents, work colleagues and supervisors; Couch, Jones and Moore, 1999;Sias et al, 2004). Employees generally have an expectation that their supervisor will provide them adequate support.…”

Section: Psychological Contracts and Employee Performancementioning

confidence: 97%

Investigating the Moderating Effects of Leader–Member Exchange in the Psychological Contract Breach–Employee Performance Relationship: A Test of Two Competing Perspectives

Restubog

Bordia

Tang

et al. 2010

British J of Management

110

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Leader-member exchange (LMX) has been characterized as a form of social support capable of buffering the effects of negative work experiences. However, employees with high-quality relationships with leaders in the organization may have stronger negative reactions when psychological contracts are breached. Thus, while a social support perspective would suggest that LMX minimizes the adverse impact of psychological contract breach on employee performance, a betrayal perspective proposes that high LMX would aggravate the negative effects. Using cross-sectional and longitudinal research designs, results across three samples provided support for the betrayal perspective. That is, breach had a stronger negative relationship with organizational citizenship behaviours and in-role performance under conditions of high LMX. Implications of these results and future research directions are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Psychological Contracts and Employee Performancementioning

confidence: 97%

Investigating the Moderating Effects of Leader–Member Exchange in the Psychological Contract Breach–Employee Performance Relationship: A Test of Two Competing Perspectives

Restubog

Bordia

Tang

et al. 2010

British J of Management

110

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some have highlighted the multifaceted nature of forgiveness by exploring the process of seeking forgiveness (e.g., Couch, Jones, & Moore, 1999; DiBlasio & Proctor, 1993; Enright, 1996; Sandage, Worthington, Hight, & Berry, 2000). The research presented here is focused on the process of granting forgiveness, with forgiveness being conceptualized as a multidimensional construct composed of forgiveness of self, others, and situations beyond anyone's control (e.g., an illness or natural disaster).…”

Section: Dispositional Forgiveness Of Self Others and Situationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dispositional Forgiveness of Self, Others, and Situations

Thompson

Snyder

Hoffman³

et al. 2005

Journal of Personality

783

699

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Six studies regarding forgiveness are presented. The Heartland Forgiveness Scale (HFS), a self-report measure of dispositional forgiveness (with subscales to assess forgiveness of self, others, and situations) was developed and demonstrated good psychometric properties. Forgiveness correlated positively with cognitive flexibility, positive affect, and distraction; it correlated negatively with rumination, vengeance, and hostility. Forgiveness predicted four components of psychological well-being (anger, anxiety, depression, and satisfaction with life); forgiveness of situations accounted for unique variance in these components of psychological well-being. Forgiveness and hostility demonstrated equivalent, inverse associations with relationship duration, and forgiveness accounted for unique variance in relationship satisfaction, even when controlling for trust. Forgiveness level correlated positively with decreased negativity in statements written about transgressions in the present versus the past tense.

show abstract

“…By definition, one can only be betrayed by a person whom one trusts; as such most betrayals are committed by people we know (Couch, Jones, & Moore, 1999)—as opposed to strangers who can still harm but not betray us (but see Bohnet & Zeckhauser, 2004; Joskowicz–Jabloner & Leiser, 2013). The present research considers betrayal from the following categories of people: a romantic partner, friends and acquaintances, family members, and people in the workplace (Elangovan & Shapiro, 1998; Fitness, 2001; Hojjat, Boon, & Lozano, 2017; W. H. Jones & Burdette, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the late 1990s and early 2000s, one research team extensively investigated types of betrayal. Jones, Couch and colleagues sought to identify various forms of betrayal across different types of relationships (Couch et al, 1999; W. H. Jones et al, 1997; W. H. Jones & Burdette, 1994; W. H. Jones, Moore, Schratter, & Negel, 2001). They collected “betrayal narratives,” asking participants to recall and describe one previous experience of betrayal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Across samples, participants often cited cases of infidelity as well as telling lies, betraying confidences, inadequate emotional support, excessive criticism, ignoring and avoiding. Less common cases of physical and psychological abuse were also identified (Couch et al, 1999; Couch et al, 2017; W. H. Jones et al, 1997; W. H. Jones & Burdette, 1994). Participants also cited different types of relationships (with the person who betrayed): most often spouses or partners but also friends, family members and work‐related relationships.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The unkindest cut of all: A quantitative study of betrayal narratives

Lalot

2023

Community & Applied Soc Psy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All close relationships come with the risk of experiencing betrayal. Despite its relevance for interpersonal relationships, the literature lacks updated knowledge about the types of betrayals people are more likely to experience and their differential consequences. This paper's aim is twofold: first, to replicate and update past findings from the 1990s to 2000s regarding the typology of betrayal narratives; and second, to provide a novel test of the role of causal attributions for response to the betrayal. It presents a quantitative analysis of more than 900 betrayal narratives from British, French and Swiss respondents (students and community participants). Participants freely reported a past episode of betrayal (betrayal narrative). Results revealed that unfaithfulness from a romantic partner was the most commonly reported instance of betrayal (17%), but there were also frequent occurrences of disappointing one's hopes and expectations, lying, revealing secrets, manipulating and taking advantage, gossiping and slandering, cutting ties unexpectedly, and failing to offer assistance during time of need. Most cases involved a close friend (27%) or romantic partner (30%); while others involved family members and people in the workplace. The most common behavioural responses were to confront or cut ties with the betrayer. Forgiveness seemed possible, especially for cases that had triggered less anger. Revenge was rarely reported overall, except in cases that had triggered more anger. Finally, causal attributions (to intrinsic vs. group‐based characteristics of the betrayer, to the situation and to the victim themselves) were related to different response to the betrayal and more specifically to forgiveness. These results contribute to developing a better typology of betrayal in interpersonal relationships. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.

show abstract

Buffering the Effects of Betrayal

Cited by 16 publications

References 40 publications

Investigating the Moderating Effects of Leader–Member Exchange in the Psychological Contract Breach–Employee Performance Relationship: A Test of Two Competing Perspectives

Investigating the Moderating Effects of Leader–Member Exchange in the Psychological Contract Breach–Employee Performance Relationship: A Test of Two Competing Perspectives

Dispositional Forgiveness of Self, Others, and Situations

The unkindest cut of all: A quantitative study of betrayal narratives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About