A summary of quantitative illegitimate tasks studies reviewed.pdf

A summary of quantitative illegitimate tasks studies reviewed

1. 1

Table-Appendix
A summary of quantitative illegitimate tasks studies reviewed
Year Author/s Sample Country Research design Antecedents Outcomes As moderators Supplementary information
2010 Semmer
et al.
199 employees
(study 1) and
205 employees
(study 2)
Switzerland Cross-sectional CWB against
supervisor (+) and colleagues (+)

Effort-reward imbalance
(+); organizational justice (-)

2010 Stocker
et al.
228 officers in
the army
Switzerland Cross-sectional Appreciation (-), job
satisfaction (-),
feelings of resentment
(+)
Job control (-), social
support (n.s.), interactional justice (-)

2013 Björk et
al.
440 managers in
28 organizations
Sweden Cross-sectional Resource deficits
(+), organizational

2013 Kottwitz
et al.
104 male
employees
Switzerland,
Germany
Three waves (6-
month time lag)
Salivary cortisol (n.s.).
Illegitimate tasks predicted cortisol
levels (+) when
subjective health is
low
Emotional stability (-/+),
work interruptions (n.s./+),
social stressor (+), health (-)
2014 Madsen
et al.
1351 employees Denmark Three waves
(from 1999-
2005)
Unnecessary tasks to
mental health (-)
Stronger when people were
older, and baseline mental
health was low
2014 Pereira et
al.
76 employees Switzerland Dairy study (2
consecutive weeks)

Sleep fragmentation
(+), sleep-onset
latency (+), sleep
efficiency (n.s.), sleep
duration (n.s.)
State negative affect
(n.s./+), time pressure
(n.s./+), social stressor at work (n.s./+), social stressor
after work (n.s.)
2014 van
Schie et
al.
191 volunteers Switzerland Cross-sectional Intent to remain (-),
work engagement (-),
self-determined
motivation (-)
Unnecessary tasks predicted
high intention to leave when role orientation is broad

2. 2

Year Author/s Sample Country Research design Antecedents Outcomes As moderators Supplementary information
2015 Schmitt
et al.
191 employees Germany Cross-sectional Time pressure
to work
engagement
(inverted U-
shape relation)
The inverted U-shape
relation between time
pressure and work
engagement was significant
when unreasonable tasks
were low
2015 Semmer
et al.
190 employees
(study 1), 224
(study 2), and
290 employees
(study 3)
Switzerland Cross-sectional
(studies 1 and
2), two waves
(2-month time
lag in study 3)
Self-esteem (-),
resentment (+),
burnout (+), irritability
(+)
Role conflict (+), social
stressors (+),
distributive/interactional/pro
cedural injustice (+)
2016 Eatough
et al.
57 employees
(study 1), 90
employees
(study 2)
Switzerland
(study 1), U.S.
(study2)
Diary studies
(10 consecutive working days)

State self-esteem (-),
job satisfaction (-),
anger (+), depressive
mood (+)
Trait self-esteem mitigated
the relationship between illegitimate tasks and state
self-esteem
2016 Omansky
et al.
213 employees The U.S. Cross-sectional Job satisfaction (-),
intrinsic Motivation (-), effort-reward
imbalance (+)
The relationship between
illegitimate tasks and the effort-reward imbalance was
stronger for males
2017 Kottwitz
et al.
29 female
service employees

Switzerland,
Germany
Diary study (5
consecutive working days)

Work
Interruptions to fluid intake (-)
is stronger when
unreasonable
tasks are high

2017 Munir et
al.
Not disclosed Pakistan Social stressor (+),
organizational justice
(-), anger (+), role
conflict (+), burnout
(-), resentment (+)

2018 Ahmed
et al.
145 participants
(U.S.), 176 participants
(India)

U.S. & India Two waves (a
3-month time
lag)
Interactional justice
(-), negative emotions
(+), work interference with family (+), work-
to-family enrichment
(-)
The links between
illegitimate tasks and work-
to-family outcomes varied
by nation

3. 3

Year Author/s Sample Country Research design Antecedents Outcomes As moderators Supplementary information
2018 Apostel
et al.
235 employees
from 4 IT
companies
Germany Cross-sectional Turnover intention (+) Appreciative leadership
buffered the relationship
2018 Elfering
et al.
125 home
caregivers
Switzerland Cross-sectional Attention failure (+),
slips, trips, and falls
(+)
Only unreasonable tasks
were investigated
2018 Fila &
Eatough
473 college
students
The U.S. Cross‐sectional Student satisfaction
(-), anxiety (+),
emotional exhaustion
(+)
Control over illegitimate
tasks did not moderate these
relationships, but instructor
support did
2018 Framke
et al.
634 employees Denmark Cluster
randomized
controlled trial
(2-year time
lag)
Participatory
organizational-
level workplace intervention (-/n.s.)

Differences were significant
for unreasonable and overall
scores of illegitimate tasks
but not for unnecessary
tasks
2018 Koch &
Adler
320 employees Germany Two waves (12-
month time lag)
Emotional exhaustion
(+), individual
innovation (n.s.)
Only unreasonable tasks
were investigated
2018 Meier &
Semmer
151 employees,
141 supervisors, 147 partners

Switzerland Cross-sectional
but multi-
source data
Emotional exhaustion
(+), incivility against supervisor (+), work-
family conflict (+)

Illegitimate tasks were self-
and supervisor-report,
incivility against the supervisor is supervisor-
report; work- family conflict
is partner-report
2018 Minei et
al.
253 employees The U.S. Experimental
design
(vignette)
Acknowledgment
(+); Explanation (-)

2018 Nylén et
al.
40 employees; 4
managers; 58
employees
(referents)
Sweden Intervention
experiment (6-
month time lag)
Occupational
intervention programs targeting
managers (+/n.s.)
Differences were significant
for unnecessary tasks but not for unreasonable tasks

2018 Sonnenta
g & Lischetzk
e

137 employees Germany Dairy study (5
consecutive
working days)
End-of-work/bedtime
negative affect (+), end-of-work/bed time
self-esteem (-),
psychological
detachment (-/n.s.)
Within- and between-level
results were different for unnecessary and
unreasonable tasks

4. 4

Year Author/s Sample Country Research design Antecedents Outcomes As moderators Supplementary information
2018 Thun et
al.
545 physicians Norway Cross-sectional Administrative
tasks (+); role
conflict (+)
Sickness presenteeism
(+)
Only unreasonable tasks
were investigated
2018 Zhou et
al.
114 employees The U.S. Diary study (10
consecutive
working days)
CWB (+), anger (+) Time pressure reinforced the
link between illegitimate
tasks and anger
2019 Anskär et
al.
290 employees Sweden Cross-sectional Role conflict (+),
quantitative
demands (+), stress
(+), quality in work
(+), conflict
between work and
personal life (+),
various work tasks
(+/n.s.)
Results were different for
unreasonable and
unnecessary tasks
2019 Kottwitz
et al.
50 psychologists
(study 1), 67
employees
(study 2), and
183 employees
(study 3)
Germany
(Study 1),
Switzerland
(studies 2
and 3)
Two waves (1-
year time lag)
Appreciation (-), job
satisfaction (-)

2019 Kronenw
ett &
Rigotti
323 employees The U.S. Weekly diary
study (across four weeks)

Time pressure
and emotional demands unfold
their
challenging
potential when
unnecessary
tasks are less
frequent

2019 Ma &
Peng
130 employees China Three waves (2-
week time lag), multi-source

Task performance (-),
proactive work behaviour (-), job
identity (-)
Supervisors rated task
performance and proactive work

5. 5

Year Author/s Sample Country Research design Antecedents Outcomes As moderators Supplementary information
2019 Muntz et
al.
347 employees Germany Four-wave
panel study (1-
week time lag)
Job dissatisfaction
(+/n.s.)
Job dissatisfaction
(+/n.s.)
Supervisors’ relational
transparency moderated these relationships.
Results
were different for
unreasonable and
unnecessary tasks
2019 Pindek et
al.
432 engineers The U.S. Cross-sectional Hostile attribution
bias (+)
Negative emotions
(+):

2019 Schulte-
Braucks
et al.
241 employees Germany Dairy study (5
consecutive
working days)
Self-esteem (-), CWB
(+)
Justice sensitivity and CWB
moderated these
relationships
2019 Sias &
Duncan
130 employees
(study 1), 154 employees
(study 2)
The U.S. Cross-sectional LMX (-); Extra-
role tasks message characteristics(+)


2020 Fila &
Eatough
214 early-career
employees
The U.S. Cross-sectional Anxiety (+),
depressive symptoms
(+)
Results were different for
unreasonable and
unnecessary tasks
2020 Graf-
Vlachy
646 managers 49 countries Cross-sectional Distress (+), anxiety
(+/n.s.), depression (+)
Unnecessary did not predict
anxiety
2020 Muntz &
Dormann
366 nurses Germany Two-wave
shortitudinal study (1- week
time lag)
Intrinsic motivation
(n.s.)
Intrinsic motivation
(n.s.)
Results were different for
unreasonable and unnecessary tasks

2020 Pfister et
al.
308 employees Switzerland Three waves (2-
month time lag)
Enthusiasm (-),
contentment (-),
depression (-/n.s.),
anxiety (-/n.s.)
Appreciation buffered the
effect of illegitimate tasks
for two facets of well-being
2020 Stein et
al.
268 employees Germany Cross-sectional Abusive
supervision (+)
Hierarchical level buffered
the link between abusive supervision and
unreasonable tasks
2020 Zhou et
al.
129 employees The U.S. Three waves (2-
month time lag)
Psychological
detachment (+), work-
to-family conflict (+)
Passive leadership
strengthened the link between illegitimate tasks
and work-to-family conflict

6. 6

Year Author/s Sample Country Research design Antecedents Outcomes As moderators Supplementary information
2021 Akyurek
& Can
503 teachers Turkey Cross-sectional Workplace well-being
(-/n.s.); Professional
identification (-/+.);
Perceived
occupational prestige
(-/n.s.)
Vertical collectivism
moderated some
relationships
2021 Chen et
al.
247 subordinates
and 48
supervisors
China Two waves (2-
week time lag), supervisor-
subordinate
matched data
Moral disengagement
(+); Unethical behaviour (+)

Perceived ethical HRM
moderated some relationships

2021 Duncan
et al.
300 employees The U.S. Experiment Likelihood of
declining a task (+)

2021 Eriksson
et al.
840 nurses Sweden Three waves (1-
year time lag)
Turnover intention (+) Various job resources did
not moderate the
relationship
2021 Faes &
Elfering
55 employees Switzerland Daily dairy
study (across
five weeks)
Musculoskeletal pain
(+/n.s.)
Unnecessary tasks, not
unreasonable tasks predicted the daily musculoskeletal
pain
2021 García
Johnson & Otto

208 participants
(study 1),
Germany
(study1),
UK, Canada,
U.S., and
Australia
(study 2)
Vignette
experiment
(study 1), cross-
sectional (Study
2)

Transgender (+/-), Perception of gender
climate (+/-), burnout
(+/n.s.), intention to
quit (n.s./-)
Although supervisors were
more likely to assign
illegitimate tasks to
transgender employees the
latter report lower frequency
of task illegitimacy
2021 Ilyas et
al.
425 employees Pakistan Cross-sectional Job satisfaction (-)
2021 Kilponen
et al.
1024 employees Finland Cross-sectional Emotional exhaustion
(+), cynicism (+),
work engagement (-),
the meaningfulness of
work (-)

2021 Mäkikan
gas et al.
453 employees Finland Two waves (1-
year time lag)
Meaning of work (-
/n.s.)
Job crafting moderated the
relationship
2021 Mauno et
al.
518 employees Finland Three waves (1-
year time lag)
living a calling (-);
Cynicism (+) ; OCB
(n.s.)

7. 7

Year Author/s Sample Country Research design Antecedents Outcomes As moderators Supplementary information
2021 Wan et
al.
216 employees China Three waves (1-
week time lag),
multi-source
Temporal
leadership (-)
Workplace deviance
(-)
Supervisors rated workplace
deviance
2021 Werdeck
er &
Esch
548 employees German Cross-sectional Life satisfaction (-),
job satisfaction (-),
burnout (+)
Work-related sense of
coherence (-), recovery
experience (-)
2021 Zeng et
al.
474 employees China Cross-sectional Effort–reward
imbalance (+); work-
family conflict (+);
turnover intention (+)

2021 Zhao et
al.
258 supervisor-
subordinate
dyads
China Two waves (4-
week time lag), multi-source
(supervisors
rated time theft)
Moral disengagement
(+), destructive voice (+), time theft (+)
Psychological entitlement
moderated the relationship
Note: “Supplementary information” display additional information, such as the correlations between illegitimate tasks and other important
variables, the moderators involved, and descriptions of the data sources. The symbols in parentheses indicate correlations with (or a dimension
of) illegitimate tasks: “+” denotes a positive correlation; “-” denotes a negative correlation; “n.s.” denotes the correlation is not significant. There
are two reasons why a parenthesis includes two symbols: First, researchers separately use unnecessary and unreasonable tasks, and they found
differential correlations for the two dimensions. Second, different waves of data or different l evels (e.g., within level and between level) of data
show differential correlations.