scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Examining the Effects of Sleep Deprivation on Workplace Deviance: A Self-Regulatory Perspective

01 Oct 2011-Academy of Management Journal (Academy of Management)-Vol. 54, Iss: 5, pp 913-934
TL;DR: In this article, the authors integrate psychological and neurocognitive perspectives to examine the effects of sleep deprivation on workplace deviance and find that sleep deprivation is correlated with workplace deviant behavior.
Abstract: The causes of workplace deviance are of increasing interest to organizations. We integrate psychological and neurocognitive perspectives to examine the effects of sleep deprivation on workplace dev...

Summary (4 min read)

Introduction

  • The causes of workplace deviance are of increasing interest to organizations.
  • Sleep deprivation costs approximately US$150 billion annually in terms of accidents and lost productivity for the U.S. economy (National Center on Sleep Disorders Research, 2003).

Workplace Deviance and Self-Regulation

  • Workplace deviance refers to behaviors that are (1) voluntary, (2) violate organizational norms, and (3) threaten the well-being of an organization and/or its members (Bennett & Robinson, 2000; Robinson & Bennett, 1995).
  • Deviance behaviors can be classified along two dimensions based on whether the behaviors’ target is organizational or interpersonal.
  • When self-regulatory efforts fail, nonoptimal motivational tendencies exert a greater influence on behavior (Baumeister, Gailliot, DeWall, & Oaten, 2006; Baumeister & Vohs, 2007).
  • Self-regulatory resource models (Baumeister et al., 1994; Muraven & Baumeister, 2000; Muraven, Tice, & Baumeister, 1998) suggest that thoughts, behaviors, and emotions are governed by finite and consumable resources that resemble energy1 (Baumeister & Vohs, 2003; Muraven & Baumeister, 2000).
  • As the authors argue next, sleep deprivation has the potential to deplete self-regulatory resources, and depletion can lead to deviance.

The Effect of Sleep Deprivation

  • Sleep is a homeostatic process that has a restorative effect on the brain and determines individual alertness (Saper, Scammell, & Lu, 2005; Weinger & Ancoli-Israel, 2002).
  • Total and partial sleep deprivation also occur across a variety of occupations owing to shift work, high workloads, sleep-related disorders, certain medications, and life style factors such as a new baby (Harrison & Horne, 2000; Weinger & AncoliIsrael, 2002).
  • (Weinger & Ancoli-Israel, 2002), military professionals, and executives working internationally and thus forced to adjust to time zone changes.
  • From a neuroscientific perspective, the effects of sleep deprivation on human behavior result from decreased brain functioning, particularly in the prefrontal cortex (Durmer & Dinges, 2005).
  • Thus, selfregulatory control of behavior is reduced when the prefrontal cortex region is impaired—a phenomenon otherwise understood as self-regulatory resource depletion.

The Role of Self-Control and State Hostility

  • The operation of self-regulatory resources is a broad concept that applies to all forms of self-regulation, including the regulation of behavior and emotions (Muraven & Baumeister, 2000).
  • When self-regulatory resources are depleted, self-control is reduced (DeWall et al., 2007; Gailliot, Schmeichel, & Baumeister, 2006).
  • In sum, drawing on self-regulatory resource theories, the authors argue that sleep deprivation decreases selfcontrol and increases the incidence of workplace deviance.
  • Because resource depletion undermines emotion regulation, negative emotions experienced following sleep deprivation are more likely to be expressed and experienced (Scott & Judge, 2006).
  • If employees expend resources to regulate negative emotions, it becomes more difficult for them to control deviant tendencies and impulses (Marlatt, 1985; Zillmann, 1993).

Sample Description

  • Sample 1 consisted of 171 nurses from a major medical center in the southwestern United States.
  • Eighty-two percent of the sample members were female, and 75 percent were white.
  • Eighteen percent reported having children under the age of four at home.

Procedures

  • No caffeine or high-sugar foods were served.
  • 00 a.m., participants completed the self-control task (described below) and a questionnaire assessing their current level of hostility, also known as At 9.
  • Participants also completed the manipulation check at this point.
  • First, participants drafted e-mail responses to fictitious undergraduate students who were interested in applying to the business college.
  • Second, participants completed an 11-item measure of mathematical reasoning and grammatical ability.

Measures

  • The authors used the method described by Vohs and colleagues (Vohs, Baumeister, Schmeichel, Twenge, Nelson, & Tice, 2008; Vohs & Heatherton, 2000) for behaviorally measuring state self-control.
  • Participants were told that their role as mentor would be to represent the business school by answering questions from potential applicants.
  • Both coders were trained to rate interpersonal deviance using a behaviorally anchored rating scale (BARS) ranging from 1 (low deviance) to 5 (high deviance).
  • Each coder then rated a separate set of 20 e-mails individually so that the authors could calculate interrater reliability.
  • The authors administered one of the forms first, as a pretest to establish a baseline for actual performance, and then administered the second form, to assess theft.

Tests of Hypotheses

  • Table 4 provides the results of the hierarchical regression analyses used to test their hypotheses.
  • The authors again followed Baron and Kenny’s steps for testing mediation.
  • For interpersonal deviance, the indirect effect of sleep deprivation was significant through hostility (coefficient .21, 95% CI .05, .41).
  • In sum, Hypothesis 2 was partially supported, and Hypothesis 3 was fully supported.

Overview

  • The authors collected a second set of data from a laboratory sample for several reasons.
  • First, the design enabled us to manipulate sleep deprivation.
  • Third, a lab study allowed for more appropriate causal inference via the use of random assignment and the manipulation of the independent variable.
  • Thus, replication in the lab allowed us to strengthen the internal validity of their model by reducing the possibility of common method effects, the influence of spurious variables, and so on.
  • Fifth, although the base rate for more extreme behaviors (e.g., theft) might have been lower in their field sample, the lab study allowed us to better assess more severe components of workplace deviance.

Sample

  • During the initial recruitment process, potential participants were not informed of the purpose of the study.
  • The screening survey also assessed any physical and psychological problems that might increase risk (e.g., sleep disorders, heart problems, anemia, epilepsy, brain damage, clinically diagnosed psychological disorders).
  • Thirty-seven participants were placed in the sleep deprivation condition, and 38 were placed in the control group.
  • All participants received course credit for their participation.

Manipulation

  • The authors adapted their manipulation from Harrison and Horne (1999), using a between-subjects design.
  • The SD participants entered the lab at 10:00 p.m. on day 1 and began the experimental measures and tasks at 9:00 a.m. on day 2, following a full night of sleep deprivation during the night of day 1.
  • During sleep deprivation, participants were confined to a lounge with board games, TV, books, magazines, and snacks available.
  • Two research assistants were paid to monitor participants in shifts to ensure that no participants slept.
  • The authors describe the experimental tasks and procedures in more detail below.

Manipulation Check

  • First, all participants in the SD group were monitored throughout the night to ensure that they did not sleep.
  • Second, participants completed a brief questionnaire assessing the number of hours of sleep they had obtained each of the previous three nights.

DISCUSSION

  • The purpose of this two-part study was to merge evidence drawn from social and organizational psychology, sleep research, and neuroscience to develop and test a theoretically and empirically driven model of the effects of sleep deprivation on workplace deviance.
  • Results from their field and lab samples largely converged to show that the effects of sleep deprivation can lead to decreased selfcontrol and increased hostility, which increase the likelihood that individuals will engage in workplace deviance.
  • The authors findings suggest that deviance is motivated by failures in self-regulation that can be induced by depletion.
  • A number of suggestions for managers interested in reducing workplace deviance emerge from their results.
  • Managers can limit sleep deprivation using preventive tactics such as sleep awareness training (e.g., insomnia reduction strategies, sleep hygiene counseling) or by attempting to design jobs in a way that reduces long hours and stressful conditions (e.g., scheduling, restricting overtime, reducing shift rotation).

Limitations

  • The authors would like to note that, despite the significance of their results in both studies, both have limitations.
  • This is a potentially important limitation present in most experimental studies of sleep deprivation, given that sleep-deprived participants are awake while control group members are not (Durmer & Dinges, 2005).
  • It is possible that deviance was underreported in the field study because of social desirability bias, which can occur when self-report measures are used.
  • Finally, the design of their field study does introduce the possibility of common method bias, and the authors attempted to deal with the issue following the recommendations of Podsakoff and colleagues (2003).

Directions for Future Research

  • The authors were not interested in the potential antecedents of sleep deprivation.
  • The reason or reasons for an employee’s sleep deprivation may influence his or her mood at work.
  • More specifically, hostility may be more strongly linked with incivility (i.e., interpersonal deviance), and self-control may have a stronger effect on more deliberate behaviors (i.e., organizational deviance); their data partially support this argument.
  • To further test this idea, the authors went back to the field data and looked at organizational and interpersonal deviance separately.

Conclusion

  • Studies regarding the effects of sleep loss have largely been ignored in the organizational literature.
  • The authors hope that their efforts to merge evidence drawn from social and organizational psychology, sleep research, and neuroscience highlight the potential effects of sleep deprivation on organizationally relevant criteria such as deviance.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

EXAMINING THE EFFECTS OF SLEEP DEPRIVATION ON
WORKPLACE DEVIANCE: A SELF-REGULATORY
PERSPECTIVE
MICHAEL S. CHRISTIAN
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
ALEKSANDER P. J. ELLIS
University of Arizona
The causes of workplace deviance are of increasing interest to organizations. We
integrate psychological and neurocognitive perspectives to examine the effects of sleep
deprivation on workplace deviance. Utilizing self-regulatory resource theories, we
argue that sleep deprivation decreases individuals’ self-control while increasing hos-
tility, resulting in increased workplace deviance. We test our hypotheses using two
samples: one comprised of nurses from a large medical center and another comprised
of undergraduate students participating in a lab study. Results from both samples
largely converge in supporting our hypotheses.
Workplace deviance represents “voluntary be-
havior that violates significant organizational
norms, and in so doing, threatens the well-being of
the organization and/or its members” (Robinson &
Bennett, 1995: 556). Deviance behaviors range from
theft, violence, vandalism, and drug use, to inter-
personal rudeness, withholding of effort, and leav-
ing early or arriving late to work (Robinson & Ben-
nett, 1995). All are problematic for organizations.
For example, yearly losses due to theft are esti-
mated at over 40 billion dollars (Coffin, 2003), and
the annual cost of absenteeism in the United States
is estimated to be around 30 billion dollars (Steers
& Rhodes, 1984). In the aggregate, deviant behavior
costs organizations as much as 200 billion dollars
annually (Murphy, 1993). Moreover, employees’
exposure to other employees’ deviance can lead to
stress-related problems, low morale, damaged self-
esteem, increased fear at work, and turnover (Gia-
calone, Riordan, & Rosenfeld, 1997; Griffin,
O’Leary-Kelly, & Collins, 1998; O’Leary-Kelly, Grif-
fin, & Glew, 1996).
A growing body of research is concerned with
identifying precursors of workplace deviance, in-
cluding various contextual elements such as social
influence, job stressors, and organizational justice
issues (e.g., Fox, Spector, & Miles, 2001; Glomb &
Liao, 2003; Greenberg, 1990; Robinson & O’Leary-
Kelly, 1998). In the current research, we argue that
theories of self-regulatory resources (e.g., Baumeis-
ter, Heatherton, & Tice, 1994), or “the internal re-
sources available to inhibit, override, or alter re-
sponses that may arise as a result of physiological
processes, habit, learning, or the press of the situ-
ation” (Schmeichel & Baumeister, 2004: 86), can
help isolate sleep deprivation as a precursor to
deviant behavior, which occurs because of impair-
ments in key self-regulatory abilities related to the
modulation of behavior and emotions.
Sleep research is becoming more relevant to or-
ganizational scholars, as the number of hours
worked annually in the United States has increased
steadily over the past several decades (National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
[NIOSH], 2004), contributing to a growing culture
of sleep deprivation. Rising economic concerns
have exacerbated the problem. In 2009, the Na-
tional Sleep Foundation (NSF) estimated that one
third of Americans are losing sleep owing to finan-
cial and economic distress. In fact, the number of
Americans who sleep fewer than six hours per
night increased from 13 to 20 percent between 1999
This article was based on the first author’s dissertation
research, conducted at the University of Arizona. We
would first like to thank Stephen Gilliland and Jerel
Slaughter for their valuable insights and suggestions as
members of the first author’s dissertation committee. We
would also like to thank our action editor and the anon-
ymous reviewers for their developmental comments
throughout the review process, which led to a much
stronger manuscript. Additionally, we appreciate the in-
sightful comments of Dick Bootzin, Jessica Siegel, Noah
Eisenkraft, and Kevin Hill. Finally, we would like to
thank Mel Win Khaw and Courtney Collen for their as-
sistance in data collection.
Editor’s note: The manuscript for this article was ac-
cepted for publication during the term of AMJ’s previous
editor, Duane Ireland.
Academy of Management Journal
2011, Vol. 54, No. 5, 913–934.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0179
913
Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved. Contents may not be copied, emailed, posted to a listserv, or otherwise transmitted without the copyright holder’s express
written permission. Users may print, download, or email articles for individual use only.

and 2009 (NSF, 2009). Some have argued that our
society is chronically sleep-deprived, with poten-
tially disastrous consequences (Bonnet & Arand,
1995; Ferrara & De Gennaro, 2001). Sleep depriva-
tion is known to have effects on alertness (Thomas
et al., 2000), performance of dynamic tracking tasks
(Collins, 1977), decision-making capacity (Harrison
& Horne, 2000), occupational injuries (Barnes &
Wagner, 2009), and worker well-being (NIOSH,
2004). Sleep deprivation costs approximately
US$150 billion annually in terms of accidents and
lost productivity for the U.S. economy (National
Center on Sleep Disorders Research, 2003). How-
ever, we believe that sleep deprivation may also be
costly in terms of its effects on deviant behavior.
Therefore, our goal in this study is to use a self-
regulatory resource perspective to highlight the po-
tential consequences of sleep deprivation for work-
place deviance. In doing so, we argue that two
critical states underlie the relationship between
sleep deprivation and workplace deviance: self-
control and hostility (see Figure 1). We define self-
control as a state of mental energy, control, and
strength that enables the exertion of control over
the self by the self (e.g., Muraven & Baumeister,
2000; Twenge, Muraven, & Tice, 2004). We define
hostility as a negative emotional state characterized
by feelings such as irritability, anger, and disgust
(e.g., Watson & Clark, 1994).
We feel that our study offers a significant contri-
bution to the organizational literature by integrat-
ing research from the social psychological, sleep,
and neurocognitive literatures to develop and test a
theoretically and empirically driven model of the
effects of sleep deprivation on workplace deviance.
By grounding our model in theories of self-regula-
tory resources, we identify a primary motivational
mechanism of deviant behavior and extend re-
cently surfacing evidence regarding the physiolog-
ical bases of self-regulation (Gailliot et al., 2007;
Masicampo & Baumeister, 2008). We believe our
self-regulatory model can help explain the ten-
dency for sleep-deprived individuals to behave in a
deviant manner and can help us pinpoint the
mechanisms underlying the effects of sleep depri-
vation on workplace deviance in an effort to ex-
pand the nomological net surrounding both vari-
ables and highlight the significant role of self-
control and hostility in the process.
The remainder of the article unfolds as follows.
First, we discuss workplace deviance, arguing that
a self-regulatory resource framework can extend cur-
rent theoretical models. Second, we discuss the effect
of sleep deprivation on deviance. Third, we discuss
the mediating role of specific self-regulatory mecha-
nisms (i.e., self-control and state hostility).
Workplace Deviance and Self-Regulation
Workplace deviance refers to behaviors that are
(1) voluntary, (2) violate organizational norms, and
(3) threaten the well-being of an organization
and/or its members (Bennett & Robinson, 2000;
Robinson & Bennett, 1995). Deviance behaviors can
be classified along two dimensions based on
whether the behaviors’ target is organizational or
interpersonal. Although meta-analyses of research
on deviance (Berry, Ones, & Sackett, 2007) and
FIGURE 1
Conceptual Model
Self-Regulatory
Depletion
Self-
control
State
Hostility
Sleep
Deprivation
Workplace
Deviance
914 OctoberAcademy of Management Journal

workplace aggression (Hershcovis et al., 2007) have
suggested that the target dimensions may be dis-
tinct, we argue that, in line with Lee and Allen
(2002) and Judge, Scott, and Ilies (2006), it is more
appropriate to focus on overall deviance in this
study. Antecedents have been shown to similarly
affect both organizational and interpersonal devi-
ance (Berry et al., 2007; Hershcovis et al., 2007); the
two dimensions are highly related to one another
(e.g., r
c
.86 [Bennett & Robinson, 2000]; r
c
.96
[Lee & Allen, 2002];
.62 [Berry et al., 2007]); and
our theoretical arguments do not imply different
relationships between variables of interest and or-
ganizational and interpersonal deviance.
Deviance is volitional (Bennett & Robinson,
2000) and can be motivated by specific instrumen-
tal cognitions such as thoughts of revenge or retal-
iation (e.g., Bies & Tripp, 1998; Bordia, Restubog, &
Tang, 2008; Martinko, Gundlach, & Douglas, 2002),
or by a desire for personal gain (Spector & Fox,
2005). Deviance can also be motivated by the need
to vent or express discrete emotions (e.g., Lee &
Allen, 2002), such as anger or frustration (Robinson
& Bennett, 1997).
We believe that a key to understanding the mo-
tivational mechanisms of deviance lies in theories
of self-regulation. An individual’s capacity to self-
regulate, or to control or inhibit his/her behaviors
and emotions, is likely to impact the extent to
which that individual acts in a normatively inap-
propriate, or deviant, manner. When self-regulatory
efforts fail, nonoptimal motivational tendencies ex-
ert a greater influence on behavior (Baumeister, Gail-
liot, DeWall, & Oaten, 2006; Baumeister & Vohs,
2007). As a result, volitional behaviors that would
otherwise be inhibited are more likely to occur.
Self-regulatory resource models (Baumeister et
al., 1994; Muraven & Baumeister, 2000; Muraven,
Tice, & Baumeister, 1998) suggest that thoughts,
behaviors, and emotions are governed by finite and
consumable resources that resemble energy
1
(Baumeister & Vohs, 2003; Muraven & Baumeister,
2000). These resources sustain all forms of self-
regulation, representing a generalized, or execu-
tive, function that allows people to control im-
pulses, desires, and emotions. Individuals have a
relatively stable self-regulatory capacity, yet this
can be depleted as a function of resource availabil-
ity (DeWall, Baumeister, Stillman, & Gailliot, 2007;
Gailliot et al., 2007). As we argue next, sleep depri-
vation has the potential to deplete self-regulatory
resources, and depletion can lead to deviance.
The Effect of Sleep Deprivation
Sleep is a homeostatic process that has a restor-
ative effect on the brain and determines individual
alertness (Saper, Scammell, & Lu, 2005; Weinger &
Ancoli-Israel, 2002). Total or partial sleep depriva-
tion represents an induced state of reduced cogni-
tive capacity (Barnes & Hollenbeck, 2009). Total
sleep deprivation is the result of at least one night
of no sleep, and partial sleep deprivation is the
result of interrupted or shortened sleep. Although
optimal sleep quantity depends on many factors,
including individual differences in sleep require-
ments (Van Dongen, Baynard, Maislin, & Dinges,
2004) and chronic sleep restriction from insomnia
or other factors (e.g., “sleep debt” [Ferrara & De
Gennaro, 2001]), the prevailing view in sleep re-
search is that 7 or more hours of sleep in a 24-hour
period is sufficient for most people (Ferrara & De
Gennaro, 2001).
Total and partial sleep deprivation are known to
have deleterious effects on human functioning.
When measures of mood, cognition, and motor
functioning are collapsed together, evidence indi-
cates that the mean level of functioning for sleep-
deprived individuals is around the ninth percentile
of non-sleep-deprived individuals (Pilcher & Huff-
cutt, 1996). Although sleep deprivation has been
shown to have little effect on logical reasoning and
rule-based cognition, its effects on divergent think-
ing and self-regulation are well documented (Har-
rison & Horne, 2000). As evidence, sleep-deprived
individuals tend to perform normally on standard-
ized tests (Blagrove, Alexander, & Horne, 1995;
Harrison & Horne, 1999; Horne, 1988; Percival,
Horne, & Tilley, 1982), but poorly on tasks requir-
ing innovative thinking, risk analysis, and strategic
planning (Harrison & Horne, 1998, 1999; Horne,
1988; McKenna, Dickinson, Orff, & Drum-
mond, 2007).
Total and partial sleep deprivation also occur
across a variety of occupations owing to shift work,
high workloads, sleep-related disorders, certain
medications, and life style factors such as a new
baby (Harrison & Horne, 2000; Weinger & Ancoli-
Israel, 2002). Although partial sleep deprivation is
more commonplace, many jobs require extended
periods of total sleep deprivation. Examples in-
clude the jobs of physicians, who are often on call
for 24 continuous hours at least once per week
1
Self-regulatory resource models differ from atten
-
tional resource models (Kahneman, 1973; Kanfer, 1990;
Kanfer & Ackerman, 1989) in that they predict a subse-
quent, rather than a concurrent, reduction in self-regula-
tion (Beal et al., 2005; Schmeichel & Baumeister, 2004).
In this sense, self-regulatory resources resemble energy
(Baumeister et al., 1998), rather than merely cognitive
capacity.
2011 915Christian and Ellis

(Weinger & Ancoli-Israel, 2002), military profes-
sionals, and executives working internationally
and thus forced to adjust to time zone changes. We
believe that both total and partial sleep deprivation
have implications for the incidence of workplace
deviance.
From a neuroscientific perspective, the effects of
sleep deprivation on human behavior result from
decreased brain functioning, particularly in the
prefrontal cortex (Durmer & Dinges, 2005). This
region contains a critical set of neocortical struc-
tures that are part of a network of areas in the brain
that have “executive” or “supervisory” control (Jen-
nings, Monk, & Van der Molen, 2003) and have
been implicated in the ability to control emotions
and inhibit behaviors (Damasio, 1994; Miller,
2000). Sleep-deprived individuals often act impul-
sively, engage in interpersonally inappropriate be-
haviors, and do not adhere to social norms (Harri-
son & Horne, 2000; Horne, 1993; Reynolds &
Schiffbauer, 2004). These results are consistent
with research indicating that impairment to the
prefrontal cortex increases antisocial behaviors
such as deceit, aggression, and violence (Anderson,
Bechara, Damasio, Tranel, & Damasio, 1999; Graf-
man, 1996).
Given that sleep deprivation reduces the execu-
tive function of the brain, we argue that it depletes
self-regulatory resources. Neuroscience suggests
that sleep deprivation impairs the prefrontal cortex
through reductions in glucose metabolism (Dahl &
Lewin, 2002; Pilcher & Huffcutt, 1996). Glucose, a
fuel for the brain, plays a critical role in the exec-
utive function and self-regulation (Gailliot et al.,
2007; Masicampo & Baumeister, 2008). Thus, self-
regulatory control of behavior is reduced when the
prefrontal cortex region is impaired—a phenome-
non otherwise understood as self-regulatory re-
source depletion.
In sum, our arguments that deviance contains a
significant self-regulatory component and that
sleep deprivation physiologically impairs the exec-
utive function of the brain (i.e., self-regulation) lead
to the following:
Hypothesis 1. Sleep deprivation increases the
incidence of workplace deviance behaviors.
The Role of Self-Control and State Hostility
The operation of self-regulatory resources is a
broad concept that applies to all forms of self-reg-
ulation, including the regulation of behavior and
emotions (Muraven & Baumeister, 2000). We argue
that self-regulatory resource depletion leads to de-
viance through both behavioral (i.e., self-control)
and emotional (i.e., state hostility) mechanisms.
Below we explain how sleep deprivation can be
conceptually and empirically linked to self-control
and state hostility, which can then be linked to
deviant behavior, establishing both as potential me-
diators of the relationship between sleep depriva-
tion and deviance.
Self-control. Self-regulatory resources determine
an individual’s level of self-control, which de-
scribes the exertion of control over behavior
(Baumeister et al., 1994; Muraven & Baumeister,
2000). When self-regulatory resources are depleted,
self-control is reduced (DeWall et al., 2007; Gail-
liot, Schmeichel, & Baumeister, 2006). Given the
role of sleep in the executive functioning of the
brain, some researchers have speculated that sleep
deprivation could impair self-control (Schmeichel
& Baumeister, 2004).
Self-control has also been linked to deviant be-
havior. Research indicates that individuals who
have depleted self-control are less able to suppress
or inhibit interpersonally aggressive or potentially
destructive impulses (DeWall et al., 2007; Tangney,
Baumeister, & Boone, 2004). Self-control depletion
leads individuals to act on impulses, often making
risky decisions (Leith & Baumeister, 1996). Mead,
Baumeister, Gino, Schweitzer, and Ariely (2009)
found that when participants performed a task re-
quiring the exertion (and thus depletion) of self-
control and were given the opportunity to cheat on
a subsequent task, they were more likely to suc-
cumb to temptation. However, as yet, we only have
direct evidence regarding the effects of trait self-
control on workplace deviance (Bordia et al., 2008;
Douglas & Martinko, 2001; Marcus & Schuler, 2004).
2
In sum, drawing on self-regulatory resource theo-
ries, we argue that sleep deprivation decreases self-
control and increases the incidence of workplace de-
viance. Because we also argue that self-control
negatively affects workplace deviance, we believe
self-control represents one mechanism underlying
the relationship between sleep deprivation and work-
place deviance, deriving the following:
Hypothesis 2. Self-control partially mediates
the relationship between sleep deprivation and
workplace deviance.
State hostility. Because the ability to regulate
emotions also involves the prefrontal cortex (Da-
vidson, Putnam, & Larson, 2000; Urry et al., 2006),
2
We define trait variables as being relatively stable
over time and conceptualized to vary between individu-
als and state variables as malleable characteristics that
are conceptualized to vary within individuals.
916 OctoberAcademy of Management Journal

sleep deprivation has the potential to impair emo-
tion regulation, whereby individuals modulate the
emotions they experience, when they experience
them, and how they express them (Gross, 1998). In
support of this idea, research has indicated that
prefrontal impairment leads to increased negative
emotions and poor emotion regulation (Davidson et
al., 2000). Although results of laboratory studies
have been inconclusive as to whether self-regula-
tory resource depletion leads directly to negative
mood (e.g., Gailliot et al., 2006; Muraven &
Baumeister, 2000), it is clear that depletion does
reduce the ability to regulate negative emotions
(Finkel & Campbell, 2001; Gailliot et al., 2006; Mu-
raven et al., 1998). Individuals with low regulatory
resources are likely to react to potentially frustrat-
ing or difficult situations in their work environ-
ments with negative emotions such as hostility,
which, we argue, becomes an issue for sleep-de-
prived employees.
In their review, Durmer and Dinges (2005) con-
cluded that virtually all forms of sleep deprivation
result in negative emotions. Their conclusion was
based on numerous studies indicating that sleep
deprivation affects the experience and expression
of irritability, hostility, and anger (e.g., Harrison &
Horne, 2000; Pilcher, Ginter, & Sadowsky, 1997;
Samkoff & Jacques, 1991; Zohar, Tzischinsky, Ep-
stein, & Lavie, 2005). For instance, Zohar and col-
leagues (2005) found that sleep loss influenced the
intensity of medical residents’ emotional responses
to events requiring self-regulation. Because re-
source depletion undermines emotion regulation,
negative emotions experienced following sleep de-
privation are more likely to be expressed and expe-
rienced (Scott & Judge, 2006).
Negative emotions have also been shown to be
related to workplace deviance (Fox et al., 2001;
Judge et al., 2006; Lee & Allen, 2002; Spector & Fox,
2002), and “approach-oriented” emotions such as
hostility and anger are particularly problematic
considering that they are associated with aggressive
reactions (Buss & Perry, 1992; Harmon-Jones &
Sigelman, 2001). From a self-regulatory perspec-
tive, when negative emotions are experienced, em-
ployees react in two ways. First, they tend to make
emotion regulation their short-term priority, be-
cause they are motivated to feel better, and so they
often fail to achieve self-regulatory goals such as
behavioral self-control (Tice & Bratslavsky, 2000;
Tice, Bratslavsky, & Baumeister, 2001; Vohs &
Heatherton, 2000). Thus, negative emotions can
lead individuals to commit impulsive, potentially
deviant behaviors if they expect their mood to im-
prove through their doing so. Second, the energy
required to control emotions is drawn from the
same pool of resources used in the self-regulation
of behavior (Beal, Weiss, Barros, & MacDermid,
2005; Tice et al., 2001; Tice & Bratslavsky, 2000). If
employees expend resources to regulate negative
emotions, it becomes more difficult for them to
control deviant tendencies and impulses (Marlatt,
1985; Zillmann, 1993).
Given our arguments above, which stem primar-
ily from self-regulatory resource theories, we ex-
pect sleep deprivation to increase hostility and the
incidence of workplace deviance. Because we also
argue that state hostility positively affects work-
place deviance, we believe state hostility repre-
sents a second mechanism underlying the relation-
ship between sleep deprivation and deviance:
Hypothesis 3. State hostility partially mediates
the relationship between sleep deprivation and
workplace deviance.
SAMPLE 1: METHODS
Sample Description
Sample 1 consisted of 171 nurses from a major
medical center in the southwestern United States.
Eighty-two percent of the sample members were
female, and 75 percent were white. Forty-
two percent were between 21 and 30 years of age
(mean 36, s.d. 11.79). Fifty-seven percent of
the sample’s members worked the day shift, from
7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m., and 43 percent worked
the night shift, from 7:00 p.m. until 7:00 a.m. Eigh-
teen percent reported having children under the
age of four at home. Preliminary analyses revealed
that working the night shift was not related to sleep
deprivation (r .07) or total hours slept (r .15);
and having a young child was not related to sleep
deprivation (r .13) or total hours slept (r .07).
Procedures
Recruitment took place under the supervision of
the head of nursing research, who presented an
overview of the study to the clinical leaders of each
unit. Subsequently, we contacted each clinical
leader to arrange a time for a brief presentation of
the study. Clinical leaders then informed the nurs-
ing staff that the study would be conducted, that
they would receive a payment of $20 each for com-
pleting the surveys, and that, if they wished to
participate, they should arrive to work ten minutes
earlier than usual on the day of survey administra-
tion. The response rate was 90 percent.
During the study, a researcher was present in the
morning and in the evening to distribute surveys.
Nurses only participated on one day. Participants
2011 917Christian and Ellis

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article found that individuals who were depleted of their self-regulatory resources by an initial act of self-control were more likely to "impulsively cheat" than individuals whose self-Regulatory resources were intact.

651 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined whether smartphone use depletes employees' regulatory resources and impairs their engagement at work the following day, and they found that smartphone use for work at night increased depletion the next morning via its effects on sleep.

476 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A meta-analytic path model is supported in which distal personality traits relate to work behaviors via the mediating effects of general and work-specific regulatory focus and is consistent with regulatory focus theory and its integrative theoretical framework.
Abstract: Regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997) has received growing attention in organizational psychology,necessitating a quantitative review that synthesizes its effects on important criteria. In addition, there isneed for theoretical integration of regulatory focus theory with personality research. Theoretical integrationis particularly relevant, since personality traits and dispositions are distal factors that are unlikelyto have direct effects on work behaviors, yet they may have indirect effects via regulatory focus. Thecurrent meta-analysis introduces an integrative framework in which the effects of personality on workbehaviors are best understood when considered in conjunction with more proximal motivational processessuch as regulatory focus. Using a distal–proximal approach, we identify personality antecedentsand work-related consequences of regulatory foci in a framework that considers both general andwork-specific regulatory foci as proximal motivational processes. We present meta-analytic results forrelations of regulatory focus with its antecedents (approach and avoid temperaments, conscientiousness,openness to experience, agreeableness, self-esteem, and self-efficacy) and its consequences (workbehaviors and attitudes). In addition to estimates of bivariate relationships, we support a meta-analyticpath model in which distal personality traits relate to work behaviors via the mediating effects of generaland work-specific regulatory focus. Results from tests of incremental and relative validity indicated thatregulatory foci predict unique variance in work behaviors after controlling for established personality,motivation, and attitudinal predictors. Consistent with regulatory focus theory and our integrativetheoretical framework, regulatory focus has meaningful relations with work outcomes and is notredundant with other individual difference variables.

474 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: The authors found that dishonesty increases when people’s capacity to exert self-control is impaired, and that people may be particularly vulnerable to this effect because they do not predict it.
Abstract: The opportunity to profit from dishonesty evokes a motivational conflict between the temptation to cheat for selfish gain and the desire to act in a socially appropriate manner. Honesty may depend on self-control given that self-control is the capacity that enables people to override antisocial selfish responses in favor of socially desirable responses. Two experiments tested the hypothesis that dishonesty would increase when people’s self-control resources were depleted by an initial act of self-control. Depleted participants misrepresented their performance for monetary gain to a greater extent than did non-depleted participants (Experiment 1). Perhaps more troubling, depleted participants were more likely than non-depleted participants to expose themselves to the temptation to cheat, thereby aggravating the effects of depletion on cheating (Experiment 2). Results indicate that dishonesty increases when people’s capacity to exert self-control is impaired, and that people may be particularly vulnerable to this effect because they do not predict it.

441 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The current review utilizes the process model of emotion regulation as an organizing framework for examining the impact of sleep upon various aspects of emotional experiences and calls for experimental research designed to clearly explicate which points in the emotion regulation process appear most vulnerable to sleep loss.

435 citations

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article seeks to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ, and delineates the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena.
Abstract: In this article, we attempt to distinguish between the properties of moderator and mediator variables at a number of levels. First, we seek to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating, both conceptually and strategically, the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ. We then go beyond this largely pedagogical function and delineate the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena, including control and stress, attitudes, and personality traits. We also provide a specific compendium of analytic procedures appropriate for making the most effective use of the moderator and mediator distinction, both separately and in terms of a broader causal system that includes both moderators and mediators.

80,095 citations


"Examining the Effects of Sleep Depr..." refers methods in this paper

  • ...We followed the three-step procedure outlined by Baron and Kenny (1986) to test these hypotheses....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A general statistical methodology for the analysis of multivariate categorical data arising from observer reliability studies is presented and tests for interobserver bias are presented in terms of first-order marginal homogeneity and measures of interob server agreement are developed as generalized kappa-type statistics.
Abstract: This paper presents a general statistical methodology for the analysis of multivariate categorical data arising from observer reliability studies. The procedure essentially involves the construction of functions of the observed proportions which are directed at the extent to which the observers agree among themselves and the construction of test statistics for hypotheses involving these functions. Tests for interobserver bias are presented in terms of first-order marginal homogeneity and measures of interobserver agreement are developed as generalized kappa-type statistics. These procedures are illustrated with a clinical diagnosis example from the epidemiological literature.

64,109 citations


"Examining the Effects of Sleep Depr..." refers methods in this paper

  • ...As Cohen’s kappa was .82, evidence of interrater reliability was sufficient (see Landis & Koch, 1977), and the remaining 110 e-mails were divided equally between the two coders....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The extent to which method biases influence behavioral research results is examined, potential sources of method biases are identified, the cognitive processes through which method bias influence responses to measures are discussed, the many different procedural and statistical techniques that can be used to control method biases is evaluated, and recommendations for how to select appropriate procedural and Statistical remedies are provided.
Abstract: Interest in the problem of method biases has a long history in the behavioral sciences. Despite this, a comprehensive summary of the potential sources of method biases and how to control for them does not exist. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to examine the extent to which method biases influence behavioral research results, identify potential sources of method biases, discuss the cognitive processes through which method biases influence responses to measures, evaluate the many different procedural and statistical techniques that can be used to control method biases, and provide recommendations for how to select appropriate procedural and statistical remedies for different types of research settings.

52,531 citations


"Examining the Effects of Sleep Depr..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Controlling for positive and negative affect also helped us reduce the potential for common method effects (Podsakoff et al., 2003)....

    [...]

  • ...We also protected the anonymity of the respondents to reduce evaluation apprehension, which reduces the effects of socially desirable responding (Podsakoff et al., 2003) and the fear of punishment for any admission of deviance (Bennett & Robinson, 2000)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: An overview of simple and multiple mediation is provided and three approaches that can be used to investigate indirect processes, as well as methods for contrasting two or more mediators within a single model are explored.
Abstract: Hypotheses involving mediation are common in the behavioral sciences. Mediation exists when a predictor affects a dependent variable indirectly through at least one intervening variable, or mediator. Methods to assess mediation involving multiple simultaneous mediators have received little attention in the methodological literature despite a clear need. We provide an overview of simple and multiple mediation and explore three approaches that can be used to investigate indirect processes, as well as methods for contrasting two or more mediators within a single model. We present an illustrative example, assessing and contrasting potential mediators of the relationship between the helpfulness of socialization agents and job satisfaction. We also provide SAS and SPSS macros, as well as Mplus and LISREL syntax, to facilitate the use of these methods in applications.

25,799 citations


"Examining the Effects of Sleep Depr..." refers background or methods in this paper

  • ...To test the significance of the indirect effect of sleep deprivation as mediated by self-control and hostility, we again used the Preacher and Hayes (2008) methodology....

    [...]

  • ...As Preacher and Hayes (2008) and others (e.g.,...

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: For comments on an earlier draft of this chapter and for detailed advice I am indebted to Robert M. Hauser, Halliman H. Winsborough, Toni Richards, several anonymous reviewers, and the editor of this volume as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: For comments on an earlier draft of this chapter and for detailed advice I am indebted to Robert M. Hauser, Halliman H. Winsborough, and Toni Richards, several anonymous reviewers, and the editor of this volume. I also wish to thank John Raisian, Nancy Rytina, and Barbara Mann for their comments and Mark Wilson for able research assistance. The opinions expressed here are the sole responsibility of the author.

11,160 citations


"Examining the Effects of Sleep Depr..." refers methods in this paper

  • ...Preacher and Hayes developed this procedure as an extension of the Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) for testing indirect effects in models that include more than one mediator....

    [...]

  • ...as an extension of the Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) for...

    [...]

Frequently Asked Questions (13)
Q1. What is the reason why people with low resources are more likely to experience negative emotions?

Because resource depletion undermines emotion regulation, negative emotions experienced following sleep deprivation are more likely to be expressed and experienced (Scott & Judge, 2006). 

Because their sample completed a survey with all self-reported variables, which is typical in deviance research (Berry et al., 2007), the authors attempted to limit the potential for common method effects by following the recommendations of Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, and Podsakoff (2003), who suggested temporally spacing the predictor and criterion variables. 

Although several studies have linked safety with sleep, the effects of sleep loss on accidents and injuries are typically considered to be caused by problems associated with motor coordination, alertness, and attention (e.g., Barnes & Wagner, 2009; Horne & Reyner, 1999; Marcus & Loughlin, 1996), rather than self-regulation. 

Negative emotions have also been shown to be related to workplace deviance (Fox et al., 2001; Judge et al., 2006; Lee & Allen, 2002; Spector & Fox, 2002), and “approach-oriented” emotions such as hostility and anger are particularly problematic considering that they are associated with aggressive reactions (Buss & Perry, 1992; Harmon-Jones & Sigelman, 2001). 

To attain a reasonable level of external validity, the authors took steps to ensure that the student participants (1) were members of the business school in which the study was conducted, (2) were instructed that the e-mail task that they performed was for the benefit of the organization (i.e., helping to recruit new students), and (3) were instructed that the organization was funding the GRE simulation task—our measure of theft. 

Another issue with the lab study involves the fact that, during the night, participants may have become bored, irritated, or more cohesive as a group, in addition to becoming sleep deprived. 

Sleep-deprived individuals often act impulsively, engage in interpersonally inappropriate behaviors, and do not adhere to social norms (Harrison & Horne, 2000; Horne, 1993; Reynolds & Schiffbauer, 2004). 

Below the authors explain how sleep deprivation can be conceptually and empirically linked to self-control and state hostility, which can then be linked to deviant behavior, establishing both as potential mediators of the relationship between sleep deprivation and deviance. 

it is possible that the low percentage of variance explained in the field sample compared to the lab sample (where variance explained rose to around 7–8 percent) could have been due to methodological differences between the two studies. 

Managers can also attempt to keep depleted employees out of situations in which they may be tempted to steal or engage in malfeasance. 

As Preacher and Hayes (2008) and others (e.g.,2008) have recommended, the authors estimated the indirect effects using unstandardized coefficients from the full model (i.e., the third step in the regression model) and utilized bootstrapping procedures with 1,000 resamples to place 95% confidence intervals (CIs) around the estimates of the indirect effects. 

In sum, drawing on self-regulatory resource theories, the authors argue that sleep deprivation decreases selfcontrol and increases the incidence of workplace deviance. 

Although sleep deprivation has increased in the workplace, studies regarding the effects of sleep loss have largely been ignored in the organizational literature.