A values-based model of contempt at work: elicitation and functional outcomes

Gerardo A. Miranda & Jennifer L. Welbourne

Journal of Managerial Psychology2026https://doi.org/10.1108/jmp-12-2024-0917article
AJG 3ABDC B
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to examine: (1) Do personal values influence the elicitation of contempt at work? (2) Does contempt motivate workplace incivility? and (3) Does contempt serve associative and social-distancing functions in the workplace? Design/methodology/approach Time-lagged online survey data were collected from 555 US full-time workers. Findings Workers felt contempt for a coworker who violated their most important personal value, motivating workplace incivility toward the coworker. Contempt was also associated with maintaining distance from a value-violating coworker and appraising oneself as relatively morally superior to that coworker, supporting that contempt serves social-distancing and associative functions at work. Originality/value This study enhances theoretical understanding of contempt’s elicitation and functionality at work through a personal values framework.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/jmp-12-2024-0917

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{gerardo2026,
  title        = {{A values-based model of contempt at work: elicitation and functional outcomes}},
  author       = {Gerardo A. Miranda & Jennifer L. Welbourne},
  journal      = {Journal of Managerial Psychology},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/jmp-12-2024-0917},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

A values-based model of contempt at work: elicitation and functional outcomes

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.