{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017543859649122806, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006578947368421052, 'mean_word_length': 5.279816513761468, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The positive and negative effects of social status on ratings of voice behavior: A test of opposing structural and psychological pathways.

We examine how social status-the amount of respect and admiration conferred by others-is related to leader ratings of team member voice. In a field study using 373 West Point cadets nested in 60 squads, we find that there are two countervailing pathways linking social status to leader voice ratings: A positive structural path via instrumental network centrality and a negative psychological path via perceived image risk. In addition, we show that these relationships are contingent upon a relational moderator, such that high-quality team interpersonal relationships weakened the positive indirect effect via instrumental network centrality but strengthened the negative indirect effect via image risk. Two post hoc experiments provided preliminary support for our arguments that perceived image risk causes people to deliver their voice in a manner that is more acceptable to recipients and ruled out several alternative explanations. The results of our multilevel analyses shed new light on how, why, and when social status impacts leader ratings of voice. In doing so, we challenge assumptions in the extant voice research and open avenues for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).