“I Just Need to Say Something”: A Self‐Determination Model of Voice

ABSTRACT Existing voice research tends to focus on the positive outcomes associated with promotive voice and the negative outcomes associated with prohibitive voice. We adopt a self‐determination theoretical lens to examine what voicers stand to gain by engaging in both types of voice despite the potential backlash against them for their voice behavior (particularly prohibitive voice). We conducted two experience‐sampling studies that examined the fluctuation of voice on a daily (Study 1) and weekly (Study 2) basis. In Study 1, we found that while promotive voice was positively associated with the voicer's psychological need satisfaction, prohibitive voice was not. In addition, the association between promotive voice and the voicer's psychological need satisfaction was stronger than that of prohibitive voice and the voicer's psychological need satisfaction. In Study 2, we found that both promotive voice and prohibitive voice were indirectly related to the voicer's authentic self‐expression and helping behavior through the mediating mechanism of psychological need satisfaction, although the indirect effects of promotive voice were stronger than the indirect effects of prohibitive voice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Organizational Behavior
Published
2025-03-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2868
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Speech and dialogue systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
17.37

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

“I Just Need to Say Something”: A Self‐Determination Model of Voice

Quan Lin, Craig Crossley, Dejun Tony Kong, Zhiqing E. Zhou et al.
7 citations
Journal of Organizational Behavior
Speech and dialogue systems
17.37
article

“I Just Need to Say Something”: A Self‐Determination Model of Voice

Quan Lin, Craig Crossley, Dejun Tony Kong, Zhiqing E. Zhou, Andrew Li
article en
7 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Existing voice research tends to focus on the positive outcomes associated with promotive voice and the negative outcomes associated with prohibitive voice. We adopt a self‐determination theoretical lens to examine what voicers stand to gain by engaging in both types of voice despite the potential backlash against them for their voice behavior (particularly prohibitive voice). We conducted two experience‐sampling studies that examined the fluctuation of voice on a daily (Study 1) and weekly (Study 2) basis. In Study 1, we found that while promotive voice was positively associated with the voicer's psychological need satisfaction, prohibitive voice was not. In addition, the association between promotive voice and the voicer's psychological need satisfaction was stronger than that of prohibitive voice and the voicer's psychological need satisfaction. In Study 2, we found that both promotive voice and prohibitive voice were indirectly related to the voicer's authentic self‐expression and helping behavior through the mediating mechanism of psychological need satisfaction, although the indirect effects of promotive voice were stronger than the indirect effects of prohibitive voice.

Journal of Organizational BehaviorVol. 46(5)
University of Central Florida (US), Johns Hopkins University (US), University of Colorado Boulder (US), West Texas A&M University (US), Shantou University (CN), Hanken School of Economics (FI)
Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong Province
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Speech and dialogue systems
17.37
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.