Personality and Individual Differences 93 (2016) 8691

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

The pathway to unethical pro-organizational behavior: Organizational

identication as a joint function of work passion and trait mindfulness
Dejun Tony Kong
Bauer College of Business, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77204, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Employees' unethical behavior is largely intended to harm organizations, but their unethical pro-organizational
Received 24 April 2015 behavior (UPB) is intended to benet organizations. A prominent force for UPB is organizational identication
Received in revised form 24 July 2015 (OID), but what determines OID remains poorly understood. A better understanding of this issue can help em-
Accepted 20 August 2015
ployees and organizations manage UPB. The current research examines how work passion and trait mindfulness
Available online 2 September 2015
jointly determine OID, which drives UPB. A eld study with 120 U.S. employees demonstrated that mindfulness
Keywords:
moderated the relationships between obsessive passion and OID and between obsessive passion and UPB, and
Unethical pro-organizational behavior OID mediated the latter relationship only when mindfulness was low. Harmonious passion was positively related
Passion to OID, yet not moderated by mindfulness. On the other hand, perceived organizational support was positively
Organizational identication related to OID, and yet not signicantly related to UPB. In order to reduce OID and resultant UPB, employees
Mindfulness can reduce obsessive passion while enhancing trait mindfulness. These ndings advance research on OID, UPB,
Perceived organizational support work passion, and mindfulness and provide practical implications for managing UPB.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Unethical activities, such as lying, embezzling money, and stealing
ofce supplies occur in work organizations (Umphress & Bingham,
2011). Most unethical activities are intended to harm organizations.
Yet engagement in some unethical activities (e.g., misrepresenting fac-
tual information to enhance the organization image), known as unethi-
cal pro-organizational behavior (UPB; Umphress, Bingham, & Mitchell,
2010), is intended to benet organizations. Although UPB is a form of
unethical behavior, it differs from many other forms in that it is volun-
tary, extra-role, and prosocial and is intended to be benecial rather
than harmful to organizations. Both Umphress and Bingham's (2011)
theoretical work and Umphress et al.'s (2010) empirical work suggest
that a prominent force for UPB is organizational identication (OID),
which refers to the degree to which an employee identies with the or-
ganization (Ashforth & Mael, 1989). Yet it remains poorly understood
what determines OID. A better understanding of this issue, for example,
from motivational and trait perspectives, can help employees and orga-
nizations manage UPB. The current research takes the rst attempt to
examine how work passion (a strong inclination toward [work] that
people like, that they nd important, and in which they invest time
and energy; Vallerand et al., 2003, p. 757) and trait mindfulness (dispo-
sitional tendency to [be] attentive to and aware of what is taking place
Author notes: The current research was funded by the Jepson School of Leadership
Studies at the University of Richmond, Virginia, USA.
E-mail address: dkong@bauer.uh.edu.
in the present; Brown & Ryan, 2003, p. 822) jointly determine OID,
which drives UPB. In so doing, the current research advances research
on OID, UPB, work passion, and mindfulness and provides practical im-
plications for managing UPB.
1.1. Theory and hypotheses
Dukerich, Kramer, and McLean Parks (1998) noted that OID can pro-
mote unethical acts that benet organizations (i.e., UPB). OID reects in-
dividuals' development of social identity (Tajfel, 1982) based on their
organizational membership and internalization of their organization's
successes and failures as their own (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Mael &
Ashforth, 1992). As individuals' OID is strengthened, their in- and
extra-role behavior is increasingly aligned with organizational values
and norms (Ashforth & Mael, 1989), thereby promoting organizational
effectiveness (Mael & Ashforth, 1995; Riketta, 2005). However, the
downside of strong OID is that individuals may pursue organizational
goals and maximize the benets for their organization, at the expense
of ethical standards and external stakeholders' interests (Umphress &
Bingham, 2011). Individuals may engage in rationalization to reduce
moral awareness and mask the ethical implications of unethical behav-
ior, by doing which they diminish dissonance between behavior and
ethical standards and alleviate threat to positive self-views (Sykes &
Matza, 1957; Umphress & Bingham, 2011). Stated otherwise, OID can
make individuals look away when trying to use unethical behavior to
promote the interests of their organization without feeling guilty or

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.08.035
0191-8869/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 D.T. Kong / Personality and Individual Differences 93 (2016) 8691
remorseful, and therefore, can prompt UPB (see Dukerich et al., 1998;
Umphress & Bingham, 2011; Umphress et al., 2010).
Hypothesis 1. OID is positively related to UPB.
In contrast, mindfulness may be an inhibitory predictor of UPB.
According to Ruedy and Schweitzer (2010), mindfulness is positively re-
lated to individuals' ethical intentions and moral identity and negatively
related to self-importance. Therefore, mindfulness is likely to inhibit
unethical behavior. Mindfulness also induces more exibility and less
impulsive/automatic responses to events (Brown, Ryan, & Creswell,
2007), thereby reducing unethical behavior (Long & Christian, 2015).
Accordingly, I expect mindfulness to be negatively related to UPB.
Hypothesis 2. Mindfulness is negatively related to UPB.
As noted earlier, little is known regarding the determinants of OID.
The extant studies have largely focused on demographic variables as
predictors of OID (Riketta, 2005). Recently, in investigating the relation-
ship between work passion and performance, Astakhova and Porter
(2015) identied harmonious and obsessive passion (Vallerand, 2010;
Vallerand et al., 2003) as facilitatory predictors of OID. Vallerand and col-
leagues' dualistic model of passion is grounded in self-determination
theory (SDT; Ryan & Deci, 2000). This model distinguishes between
two forms of passionharmonious and obsessive passionbased on
their autonomous versus controlled nature and the varying level of in-
ternalization of activities into self-identity (Vallerand, 2010; Vallerand
et al., 2003). SDT suggests that depending on the degree to which a mo-
tivated individual endorses an activity, the individual has either autono-
mous or controlled motivation; autonomous motivation occurs when an
individual autonomously chooses to initiate and engage in an activity,
whereas controlled motivation occurs when an individual feels com-
pelled to initiate and engage in an activity (Ryan & Deci, 2000). SDT
also posits that autonomous motivation and controlled motivation are
not bipolar opposites (Ryan & Connell, 1989), but rather, can co-exist.
Harmonious passion derives from autonomous motivation and
autonomous internalization of an activity into self-identity, whereas
obsessive passion derives from controlled motivation and the lack of in-
ternalization of an activity into self-identity (Vallerand, 2010; Vallerand
et al., 2003). As autonomous and controlled motivations can exist con-
currently, individuals can experience harmonious and obsessive passion
simultaneously. Accordingly, previous research has treated these two
forms of passion as parallel factors (see Vallerand, 2010). Despite the
difference between harmonious and obsessive passion, individuals
with either form of work passion have strong work engagement
(Astakhova & Porter, 2015), which fosters their sense of control and
social inuence, psychological ownership, and self-esteem within their
organization as well as peer recognition of their contributions to their
organization; all of these factors are likely to cultivate OID (Galvin,
Lange, & Ashforth, 2015).
Hypothesis 3. (a) Harmonious passion and (b) obsessive passion are
positively related to OID.
Mindfulness may moderate the relationship between obsessive pas-
sion and OID. As Brown et al. (2007) noted, mindfulness simply offers a
bare display of what it taking place, rather than generating accounts of
semantic, syntactic, or other cognitive functions (Shear & Jevning, 1999,
p. 204) (p. 216). It does not necessarily provide motivational input, but
more likely, alters the effects of external factors (e.g., expressive writing
intervention, life hassles, and social evaluative threat) on physical and
psychological states (e.g., Brown, Weinstein, & Creswell, 2012; Marks,
Sobanski, & Hine, 2010; Poon & Danoff-Burg, 2011). Obsessive passion,
as a result of controlled motivation, is largely driven by external pres-
sure (e.g., incentives and peer pressure) (Vallerand et al., 2003). Its rela-
tionship with OID is likely to be moderated by mindfulness.
Mindfulness enables individuals to distance themselves from their
problematic thoughts and feelings, thereby helping them reach a
87
neutral state rather than dwell on problematic thoughts and feelings
(Brown et al., 2007; Kang, Gruber, & Gray, 2013). Individuals with
obsessive passion tend to experience stronger negative than positive
emotions (Philippe, Vallerand, Houlfort, Lavigne, & Donahue, 2010;
Vallerand, Rousseau, Grouzet, Dumais, & Grenier, 2006; Vallerand
et al., 2003). Negative emotions narrow the attention scope and limit
the thought-behavior repertoire (Fredrickson, 2001). Those with obses-
sive passion tend to xate their attention to work and become obsessed
with working, thus increasing their perceived self-work overlap and
OID. When experiencing negative emotions, individuals are also moti-
vated to repair emotions (Larsen, 2000). Individuals with obsessive pas-
sion are likely to repair negative feelings through work, particularly
when they perceive recognition and rewards for work (George &
Zhou, 2002) and attain pride and satisfaction from work achievements,
thereby increasing their perceived self-work overlap and OID. Mindful-
ness may help individuals step back from their obsessive passion and
negative feelings, allowing them to observe and re-evaluate their moti-
vation and behavior in a less negative manner. Thus, mindfulness may
attenuate the relationship between obsessive passion and OID.
Hypothesis 4. Mindfulness moderates (attenuates) the relationship
between obsessive passion and OID.
2. Method
2.1. Participants and procedure
One hundred and twenty U.S. employees (30.0% female) recruited
via the StudyResponse project completed the study online, which
entailed two questionnaires, approximately three weeks apart. Partici-
pants had an average age of 37.00 years (SD = 7.03) and an average or-
ganizational tenure of 6.83 years (SD = 3.09). All of them had received
at least some college education. Almost all of them were full-time
employees (99.2%) working in various industries.
2.2. Measures
Participants reported their work passion, OID, and other factors
(control variables) at Time 1, and reported their UPB and trait mindful-
ness at Time 2. I collected data over the surveys at two time points to
procedurally reduce common method bias (cf. Podsakoff, MacKenzie,
& Podsakoff, 2012).
2.3. Work passion
On a seven-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly
agree), participants responded to seven items of harmonious passion
( = .87) and seven items of obsessive passion ( = .87) adapted
from Vallerand et al.'s (2003) measures. Sample items include My
work is in harmony with the other activities in my life (harmonious
passion) and I have almost an obsessive feeling for my work (obses-
sive passion).
2.4. Mindfulness
On a six-point scale from 1 (almost always) to 6 (almost never), par-
ticipants responded to Brown and Ryan's (2003) fteen items of trait
mindfulness ( = .93).
2.5. OID
On a ve-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree),
participants responded to Mael and Ashforth's (1992) six items of OID
( = .82).
88 D.T. Kong / Personality and Individual Differences 93 (2016) 8691

2.6. UPB
On a seven-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly
agree), participants responded to Umphress et al.'s (2010) six items of
UPB ( = .97).
2.7. Control variables
Besides the demographics including age, gender (1 = female, 0 =
male), organizational tenure (in years), and job level (1 = entry level,
2 = intermediate level, 3 = middle management level, 4 = upper man-
agement level, 5 = executive), perceived organizational support (POS),
derived from social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) and indicating
the quality of organizationemployee social exchange (Eisenberger,
Armeli, Rexwinkel, Lynch, & Rhoades, 2001), was also included, given
that positive organizationemployee exchange might also drive UPB
(Umphress & Bingham, 2011; Umphress et al., 2010). On a ve-point
scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), participants
responded to Eisenberger et al.'s (2001) six items of POS ( = .72).
2.8. Data analysis
To test the hypotheses, I performed hierarchical regression analyses
in SPSS 22. In predicting OID, obsessive passion, mindfulness, POS, and
demographics were rst included (Model 1), followed by harmonious
passion (Model 2) and the interaction of obsessive passion and mindful-
ness (Model 3). In predicting UPB, obsessive passion, mindfulness, POS,
and demographics were rst included (Model 4). Yet adding harmoni-
ous passion caused suppression (Model 5), and thus, harmonious
passion was excluded. In the next few steps (post-hoc analyses), the
interaction of obsessive passion and mindfulness (Model 6) and OID
(Model 7) were separately added, and nally, they were simultaneously
included (Model 8).
3. Results
3.1. Preliminary analyses
Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics and correlations. Harmoni-
ous passion (r = .61, p b .001) and obsessive passion (r = .43, p b .001)
were both positively correlated with OID. UPB and OID were positively
correlated (r = .33, p b .001). Mindfulness was only signicantly corre-
lated with OID (r = .18, p b .05) and UPB (r = .25, p b .01).
3.2. Hypothesis testing
Table 2 presents the results of hierarchical regression analyses.
Hypothesis 1 predicts a positive relationship between OID and UPB.
Adding harmonious passion in Model 5 caused suppression, because
harmonious passion had a non-signicant bivariate correlation with
UPB (r = .00, p = .97) and yet a negative relationship with UPB in the
regression analysis ( = .60, p b .001). Therefore, harmonious passion
was excluded. OID was positively related to UPB (Model 7: = .36,
p b .01), supporting Hypothesis 1, whereas mindfulness was negatively
related to UPB (Model 4: = .26, p b .01), supporting Hypothesis 2.
Consistent with Umphress and Bingham's (2011) model, POS was
positively related to OID (Model 2: = .47, p b .001). So was harmoni-
ous passion (Model 2: = .28, p b .01). Yet mindfulness was negatively
related to OID (Model 2: = .19, p b .01). Without harmonious
passion considered, obsessive passion was positively related to OID
(Model 1: = .23, p b .01), but with harmonious passion considered
simultaneously, obsessive passion was not signicantly related to OID
any more (Model 2: = .08, p = .42). Therefore, Hypothesis 3a was
supported whereas Hypothesis 3b was not.
The interaction of obsessive passion and mindfulness was nega-
tively related to OID (Model 3: = .20, p b .01). A simple slope
test (Hayes, 2013), with all the control variables included, indicated
that the relationship between obsessive passion and OID was positive
(simple slope = .12, SE = .06, t = 2.01, p b .05) when mindfulness
was low (1 SD) but non-signicant (simple slope = .06, SE = .07,
t = .88, p = .38) when mindfulness was high (+1 SD) (see Fig. 1).
Therefore, Hypothesis 4 was supported.
3.3. Post-hoc analyses
I examined whether OID mediated the interactive effect of obsessive
passion and mindfulness on UPB, given that the interaction term was
negatively related to UPB (Model 3: = .20, p b .05) but became
non-signicant (Model 5: = .15, p = .09) when OID was included.
A simple slope test (Hayes, 2013), which included all the control vari-
ables but harmonious passion, indicated that the relationship between
obsessive passion and UPB was positive when mindfulness was low
(1 SD) (simple slope = .77, SE = .20, t = 3.76, p b .001) but non-
signicant when mindfulness was high (+1 SD) (simple slope = .26,
SE = .21, t = 1.26, p = .21) (see Fig. 2). A mediated moderation test
(Hayes, 2013), which used a 1000-replication bootstrapping and includ-
ed all the control variables but harmonious passion, indicated that OID
fully mediated the interaction effect of obsessive passion and mindful-
ness on UPB (indirect effect = .07, bootstrap SE = .05, bootstrap
95% bias-corrected condence interval (CI95%) [.20, .004] excluding
zero). OID mediated (indirect effect = .19, bootstrap SE = .12, CI95% [.03,
.53] excluding zero) the relationship between obsessive passion and
UPB when mindfulness was low (1 SD) but was not a signicant
mediator (indirect effect = .06, bootstrap SE = .09, CI95% [.06, .33]
including zero) when mindfulness was high (+1 SD).
Finally, although mindfulness moderated the relationships between
obsessive passion and OID and between obsessive passion and UPB, it
did not moderate the relationship between harmonious passion and
OID or between harmonious passion and UPB.
4. Discussion
The current study examined the relationships among work passion,
mindfulness, OID, and UPB. It advances research on UPB, OID, work

Table 1
Descriptive Statistics and Correlations.

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Harmonious passion 5.28 .90

2. Obsessive passion 5.00 1.06 .72***
3. Mindfulness 3.97 .93 .06 .08
4. Organizational identication (OID) 3.79 .67 .61*** .43*** .18*
5. Unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB) 4.27 1.86 .00 .29** .25** .33***
6. Perceived organizational support (POS) 3.72 .64 .64*** .43*** .05 .70*** .14
7. Age 37.00 7.03 .04 .17 .08 .10 .28** .09
8. Female .30 .46 .20* .30** .09 .09 .09 .13 .21*
9. Organizational tenure 6.83 3.09 .01 .01 .02 .17 .07 .13 .21* .09
10. Job level 2.33 .85 .06 .23* .01 .04 .03 .02 .21* .24* .29**

Note. N = 120. *p b .05; **p b .01 and ***p b .001 (two-tailed).

 D.T. Kong / Personality and Individual Differences 93 (2016) 8691 89

Table 2
Results of hierarchical regression analyses predicting organizational identication (OID) and unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB).

OID OID OID UPB UPB UPB UPB UPB

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Model 7 Model 8

Predictor

Age .06 .06 .08 .23* .22** .21* .25** .23**

Female .06 .06 .06 .05 .04 .05 .03 .03
Organizational tenure .08 .09 .07 .05 .09 .08 .08 .09
Job level .03 .01 .01 .09 .14 .10 .08 .09
POS .58*** .47*** .45*** .04 .28** .03 .18 .15
Harmonious passion .28** .32** .60***
Obsessive passion .23** .08 .05 .29** .63*** .29** .21* .22*
Mindfulness .18** .19** .24*** .26** .24** .30*** .19 .24**
Obsessive passion mindfulness .20** .20* .15
OID .36** .31*
R2 .56 .58 .62 .22 .34 .26 .28 .30
F (df1, df2) 20.00 19.31 19.72 4.47 7.25 4.75 5.31 8.83
(7, 112)*** (8, 111)*** (9, 110)*** (7, 112)*** (8, 111)*** (8, 111)*** (8, 111)*** (11, 108)***
Baseline model for R2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 4 Model 4 Model 4 Model 6
R2 .02 .04 .12 .04 .06 .04
F (df1, df2) 7.01 10.18 21.13 5.49 9.00 6.32
(1, 111)** (1, 110)** (1, 111)*** (1, 111)* (1, 111)** (1, 110)*

Note. N = 120. *p b .05; **p b .01 and ***p b .001 (two-tailed).

passion, and mindfulness. First, the current ndings advance UPB re-
search, which is still in its infancy and has received little empirical atten-
tion. OID is a driver for UPB, whereas, POSan important determinant of
UPB (Umphress & Bingham, 2011)had a null relationship with UPB,
when OID, obsessive passion, and mindfulness were controlled for.
These ndings, taken together, suggest that UPB is driven by identity-
and motivation-related processes rather than by an exchange-related
process. This insight distinguishes UPB from other forms of prosocial
behavior (e.g., citizenship behavior) largely driven by social exchange
(Lavelle, Rupp, & Brockner, 2007). Mindfulness also appeared to attenu-
ate the relationship between obsessive passion and UPB, and OID
mediated this relationship, yet only among low-mindfulness individ-
uals. These ndings further suggest that UPB is merely a product of
low-mindfulness individuals' obsessive work passion and resultant
(unhealthy) OID.
Second, the current research contributes to OID research by iden-
tifying work passion and mindfulness as novel determinants. Speci-
cally, the positive linkage between harmonious passion and OID
replicated Astakhova and Porter's (2015) nding. This relationship
was not moderated by mindfulness, perhaps because harmonious
passion is associated with intrapersonal harmony, positive emotions,
and reduced negative emotions, and thus does not call for individuals'
distancing from or neutralizing problematic thoughts or feelings.
However, inconsistent with Astakhova and Porter's (2015) nding,
obsessive passion was not directly related to OID; Obsessive passion
had a positive relationship with OID among low-mindfulness individ-
uals, and yet a null relationship among high-mindfulness individuals.
Third, the current study advances the growing literature on
work passion (Ho, Wong, & Lee, 2011; Perrew, Hochwarter, Ferris,
McAllister, & Harris, 2014; Zigarmi, Nimon, Houson, Witt, & Diehl,
2009), which has largely focused on performance and well-being as out-
comes of work passion. The current research is the rst to investigate
OID (identity) and UPB (behavior) as outcomes of work passion. Har-
monious passion fostered OID among both high- and low-mindfulness
individuals, whereas obsessive passion facilitated OID and UPB only
among low-mindfulness individuals. Therefore, harmonious passion is
a facilitatory factor for healthy identity management, whereas obsessive
passion is an inhibitory factor for healthy behavioral regulation and
identity management among low-mindfulness individuals.
Fourth, despite the important role of mindfulness in organizations
noted by researchers (Dane, 2011), empirical research is scarce, except
for some studies (e.g., Dane & Brummel, 2014; Reb, Narayanan, &
Chaturvedi, 2014; Reb, Narayanan, & Ho, 2015). The current research
adds to this emerging line of inquiry. The non-signicant relationship
between work passion and mindfulness is intriguing, presumably be-
cause work passion, which is grounded in SDT, has an inherent link to

Fig. 1. Mindfulness as a moderator for the relationship between obsessive passion and Fig. 2. Mindfulness as a moderator for the relationship between obsessive passion and
organizational identication (OID). unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB).
90 D.T. Kong / Personality and Individual Differences 93 (2016) 8691
motivation, whereas mindfulness, as noted earlier, provides little moti-
vational input. Moreover, the moderating role of trait mindfulness,
compared to its determinant role, has received far less attention. Yet
mindfulness moderates the relationships between implicit and explicit
emotions (Niemiec et al., 2010), between implicit attitudes/motivation
and explicit motivation/behavior (Chatzisarantis & Hagger, 2007;
Levesque & Brown, 2007), between neuroticism and behavioral/
decision-making outcomes (Feltman, Robinson, & Ode, 2009; Kong,
2015), and between external factors and physical and psychological re-
sponses (Brown et al., 2012; Marks et al., 2010; Poon & Danoff-Burg,
2011). While mindfulness had direct relationships with OID and UPB
in the current research, its moderating effects are likely to energize
the inquiry regarding its different roles in organizational settings.
The current research has some noteworthy limitations. First,
although the data were collected at two time points, they were cross-
sectional in nature. Future research may investigate longitudinal
relationships to explicitly test the claimed causality. Second, like
Umphress et al. (2010), UPB was rated by participants themselves.
When condition permits, future research may use supervisor or co-
worker ratings of UPB instead to reduce common-method common-
source bias. Future research may also use neuroimaging rather than
self-report data of OID (e.g., Volz, Kessler, & von Cramon, 2009) to
reduce common-method common-source bias. Finally, the measure
of mindfulness was based on Brown and Ryan's (2003) denition,
which some researchers deem too narrow. Future research can investi-
gate whether multifaceted mindfulness (e.g., Bergomi, Tschacher, &
Kupper, 2013) would play a similar role in organizational settings.
Researchers may also investigate state/momentary mindfulness in-
duced by mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) (Kabat-Zinn,
1990), in addition to trait mindfulness.
Practically speaking, in order to reduce UPB, employees should culti-
vate harmonious passion and trait mindfulness, while reducing obses-
sive passion and associated unhealthy OID. Harmonious passion can be
fostered by enhancing intrinsic work motivation and perceived self-
determination, for example, via job design, leadership, and cultural
change. Moreover, organizations may consider creating programs of
MBSR and encouraging employees to regularly practice mindful breath-
ing (Mrazek, Smallwood, & Schooler, 2012). These practices can enhance
employees' habitual mindfulness, which not only reduces OID and UPB,
but also improves other aspects of work life (Brown et al., 2007).
References
Ashforth, B.E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of
Management Review, 14, 2039.
Astakhova, M.N., & Porter, G. (2015). Understanding the work passionperformance
relationship: The mediating role of organizational identication and moderating
role of t at work. Human Relations, 132 in press.
Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2013). The assessment of mindfulness with self-
report measures: Existing scales and open issues. Mindfulness, 4, 191202.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley.
Brown, K.W., & Ryan, R.M. (2003). The benets of being present: Mindfulness and its role
in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822848.
Brown, K.W., Ryan, R.M., & Creswell, J.D. (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations
and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry, 18, 211237.
Brown, K.W., Weinstein, N., & Creswell, J.D. (2012). Trait mindfulness modulates neuroen-
docrine and affective responses to social evaluative threat. Psychoneuroendocrinology,
37, 20372041.
Chatzisarantis, N.L.D., & Hagger, M.S. (2007). Mindfulness and the intentionbehavior
relationship within the theory of planned behavior. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 33, 663676.
Dane, E. (2011). Paying attention to mindfulness and its effects on task performance in
the workplace. Journal of Management, 37, 9971018.
Dane, E., & Brummel, B.J. (2014). Examining workplace mindfulness and its relations to
job performance and turnover intention. Human Relations, 67, 105128.
Dukerich, J.M., Kramer, R.M., & McLean Parks, J. (1998). The dark side of organizational
identication. In D. Whetten, & P. Godfrey (Eds.), Identity in organizations: Developing
theory through conversations (pp. 245256). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P.D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation
of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 4251.
Feltman, R., Robinson, M.D., & Ode, S. (2009). Mindfulness as a moderator of neuroticism
outcome relations: A self-regulation perspective. Journal of Research in Personality, 43,
953961.
Fredrickson, B.L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The
broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218226.
Galvin, B.M., Lange, D., & Ashforth, B.E. (2015). Narcissistic organizational identication:
Seeing oneself as central to the organization's identity. Academy of Management
Review, 40, 163181.
George, J.M., & Zhou, J. (2002). Understanding when bad moods foster creativity and good
ones don't: The role of context and clarity of feelings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87,
687697.
Hayes, A.F. (2013). Introduction to meditation, moderation, and conditional process analysis:
A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford.
Ho, V.T., Wong, S. -S., & Lee, C.H. (2011). A tale of passion: Linking job passion and cogni-
tive engagement to employee work performance. Journal of Management Studies, 48,
2647.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your mind to face stress,
pain and illness. New York, NY: Dell.
Kang, Y., Gruber, J., & Gray, J.R. (2013). Mindfulness and de-automatization. Emotion
Review, 5, 192201.
Kong, D.T. (2015). The role of mindfulness and neuroticism in predicting acculturative
anxiety forecasting error. Mindfulness, in press.
Larsen, R.J. (2000). Toward a science of mood regulation. Psychological Inquiry, 11,
129141.
Lavelle, J.J., Rupp, D.E., & Brockner, J. (2007). Taking a multifoci approach to the study of
justice, social exchange, and citizenship behavior: The target similarity model.
Journal of Management, 33, 841866.
Levesque, C., & Brown, K.W. (2007). Mindfulness as a moderator of the effect of implicit
motivational self-concept on day-to-day behavioral motivation. Motivation and
Emotion, 31, 284299.
Long, E.C., & Christian, M.S. (2015). Mindfulness buffers retaliatory responses to injustice:
A regulatory approach. Journal of Applied Psychology in press.
Mael, F.A., & Ashforth, B.E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of
the reformulated model of organizational identication. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 13, 103123.
Mael, F.A., & Ashforth, B.E. (1995). Loyal from day one: Biodata, organizational identica-
tion, and turnover among newcomers. Personnel Psychology, 48, 309333.
Marks, A.D.G., Sobanski, D.J., & Hine, D.W. (2010). Do dispositional rumination and/or
mindfulness moderate the relationship between life hassles and psychological
dysfunction in adolescents? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 44,
831838.
Mrazek, M.D., Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J.W. (2012). Mindfulness and mind-wandering
nding convergence through opposing constructs. Emotion, 12, 442448.
Niemiec, C.P., Brown, K.W., Kashdan, T.B., Cozzolino, P.J., Breen, W.E., Levesque-Bristol, C.,
& Ryan, R.M. (2010). Being present in the face of existential threat: The role of trait
mindfulness in reducing defensive responses to mortality salience. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 344365.
Perrew, P.L., Hochwarter, W.A., Ferris, G.R., McAllister, C.P., & Harris, J.N. (2014). Devel-
oping a passion for work passion: Future directions on an emerging construct.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 145150.
Philippe, F.L., Vallerand, R.J., Houlfort, N., Lavigne, G.L., & Donahue, E.G. (2010). Passion for
an activity and quality of interpersonal relationships: The mediating role of emotions.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 917932.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., & Podsakoff, N.P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social
science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of
Psychology, 63, 539569.
Poon, A., & Danoff-Burg, S. (2011). Mindfulness as a moderator in expressive writing.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67, 881895.
Reb, J., Narayanan, J., & Chaturvedi, S. (2014). Leading mindfully: Two studies on the in-
uence of supervisor trait mindfulness on employee well-being and performance.
Mindfulness, 5, 3645.
Reb, J., Narayanan, J., & Ho, Z.W. (2015). Mindfulness at work: Antecedents and conse-
quences of employee awareness and absent-mindedness. Mindfulness, 6, 111122.
Riketta, M. (2005). Organizational identication: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 66, 358384.
Ruedy, N.E., & Schweitzer, M.E. (2010). In the moment: The effect of mindfulness on
ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 7387.
Ryan, R.M., & Connell, J.P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Exam-
ining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
57, 749761.
Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrin-
sic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55,
6878.
Shear, J., & Jevning, R. (1999). Pure consciousness: Scientic exploration of meditation
techniques. In F.J. Varela, & J. Shear (Eds.), The view from within (pp. 189209).
Thorverton, UK: Imprint Academics.
Sykes, G., & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization. American Sociological Review,
22, 664670.
Tajfel, H. (1982). Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Umphress, E.E., & Bingham, J.B. (2011). When employees do bad things for good rea-
sons. Examining unethical pro-organizational behaviors. Organization Science, 22,
621640.
Umphress, E.E., Bingham, J.B., & Mitchell, M.S. (2010). Unethical behavior in the name of
the company: The moderating effect of organizational identication and positive
reciprocity beliefs on unethical pro-organizational behavior. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 95, 769780.
Vallerand, R.J. (2010). On passion for life activities: The dualistic model of passion.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 97193.
 D.T. Kong / Personality and Individual Differences 93 (2016) 8691 91

Vallerand, R.J., Blanchard, C., Mageau, G.A., Koestner, R., Ratelle, C., Lonard, M., ... Marsolais,
J. (2003). Les passions de l'me: On obsessive and harmonious passion. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 756767.
Vallerand, R.J., Rousseau, F.L., Grouzet, F.M.E., Dumais, A., & Grenier, S. (2006). Passion in
sport: A look at determinants and affective experiences. Journal of Sport & Exercise
Psychology, 28, 454478.
Volz, K.G., Kessler, T., & von Cramon, D.Y. (2009). In-group as part of the self: In-group fa-
voritism is mediated by medial prefrontal cortex activation. Social Neuroscience, 4,
244260.
Zigarmi, D., Nimon, K., Houson, D., Witt, D., & Diehl, J. (2009). Beyond engagement: To-
ward a framework and operational denition for employee work passion. Human
Resource Development Review, 8, 300326.