See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/338412255

Psychological ownership within psychology of working theory: A three-

wave study of gender and sexual minority employees
Article in Journal of Vocational Behavior · April 2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103374

CITATIONS READS

2 437

3 authors, including:

Rachel Williamson Smith Lisa Baranik

Louisiana State University University at Albany, The State University of New York
26 PUBLICATIONS 286 CITATIONS 35 PUBLICATIONS 1,094 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Medical Education Decisions Survey View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rachel Williamson Smith on 06 January 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Vocational Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com

Psychological ownership within psychology of working theory: A three-wave

study of gender and sexual minority employees☆
Rachel Williamson Smith a , , Lisa E. Baranik b , Ryan D. Duffy c
a Louisiana State University, United States of America
b
University at Albany, United States of America
c
University of Florida, United States of America

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The present study examines the experiences of gender and sexual minority employees regarding
Psychology of working their ability to secure decent work. Specifically, we extend psychology of working theory (PWT) by
LGBTQ+ integrating social identity theory and incorporating psychological ownership into the model. We
Psychological ownership
tested our hypotheses in a sample of 240 gender and sexual minority employees gathering data at
Decent work
three time points over a two-week period. Financial strain, work volition, and psycho-logical
ownership were all found to directly predict decent work and work volition was found to mediate the
effects of financial strain and workplace climate to decent work. Although climate was significantly
predicted by psychological ownership, it failed to mediate the climate-decent work relation,
highlighting the need for future research to examine additional constructs in and refinement of
PWT. We offer suggestions for future research on PWT and the experiences of mar-ginalized
employees, particularly gender and sexual minority employees.

It is estimated that 2.7 to 4.5% of the world's population identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) (OECD, 2019;
The Williams Institute, 2019). However, the true number is likely larger, given that gender and sexual identities can be concealable
and thus are often undisclosed (King, Mohr, Peddie, Jones, & Kendra, 2014), additional gender and sexual minorities exist beyond
the simplified categorization of LGBT (i.e., queer, gender non-conforming, pansexual, asexual, etc.), and in some countries
homosexuality is actively discouraged and even illegal. In the context of decent work, gender and sexual minority employees may
face a variety of barriers, such as having to manage their concealable or “invisible identity” in the workplace, which has been
conceptualized as a job demand (Jones & King, 2014; Ragins, Singh, & Cornwell, 2007; Williamson, Beiler-May, Locklear, & Clark,
2017). Regardless of whether a sexual or gender minority employee discloses their identity in the workplace, both sexual orientation
(Meyer, 2019; Rule, Bjornsdottir, Tskhay, & Ambady, 2016) and gender minority identities (Grant et al., 2011) have been shown to
influence occupational opportunities, including biases in hiring decisions and increased discrimination in the workplace. In the
present study, we seek to better understand factors that promote access to decent work among gender and sexual minority
employees, using a Psychology of Working Theory lens (PWT; Duffy, Blustein, Diemer, & Autin, 2016).
PWT was developed to capture the work-related experiences of all individuals, but especially marginalized workers, whose expe-
riences are often underrepresented in psychological research (e.g., see Griggs et al., 2016). Research on this relatively new theory
has studied various marginalized populations (e.g., Duffy et al., 2018; Tokar & Kaut, 2018) and has tested the theory cross-cultur-
ally (e.g., Kozan, Işik, & Blustein, 2019; Wang et al., 2019). Yet, additional research is needed to expand the current state of the

☆ Rachel Williamson Smith, Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University; Lisa E. Baranik, School of Business, University at Albany; Ryan D. Duffy,

Department of Psychology, University of Florida.

Corresponding author at: Louisiana State University, Department of Psychology, 236 Audubon Hall, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, United States of
America. Email address: rsmith3@lsu.edu (R.W. Smith)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103374
Received 19 August 2019; Received in revised form 12 December 2019; Accepted 31 December 2019
Available online xxx
0001-8791/ © 2018.
R.W. Smith et al. Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

PWT, particularly in examining possible additive constructs to the original model and gathering data at multiple time points. In the
current research, we examine core tenets of PWT in a gender and sexual minority population and expand upon previous research in
two ways. First, a majority of PWT studies have found the career adaptability construct to function inconsistently. In the current
study we substitute adaptability with a related yet distinct construct, psychological ownership. In doing so, we incorporate the robust
literature on identity threat models of stigma (Crocker, Major, & Steele, 1998; Major & O'Brien, 2005; Major, Quinton, & McCoy,
2002; Steele, Spencer, & Aronson, 2002) and stress and coping (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984) in order to better describe the
psycholog-ical processes that occur when marginalized employees face discrimination. Second, we examine the PWT model using
a three-wave panel design, whereas previous studies have primarily utilized a single timepoint of data collection. We selected a
short time lag (one week between each wave) as scholars have suggested that panel studies may benefit from shorter time lags to
identify psycho-logical processes as they unfold and to reduce upward biases due to unmeasured confounding variables (Dormann
& Griffin, 2015). Furthermore, a time lag between constructs more accurately reflects the process of mediation, as the influence of
indirect effects is likely not instantaneous (Stone-Romero & Rosopa, 2008). Additionally, this design helps to alleviate common
method bias (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff, 2012), and captures the temporal order theoretically proposed by the PWT, thus
extending the majority of research on PWT to date.
1. Theoretical framework and research base

PWT (Duffy et al., 2016) seeks to explain the work experiences of all individuals, particularly honing in on contextual factors that predict
the securement of decent work. Decent work is the theory's core construct, which consists of five factors: safe working conditions, adequate
compensation, allowance for free time and rest, access to health care, and values consistent with one's personal and community values
(Blustein, Olle, Connors-Kellgren, & Diamonti, 2016; Duffy et al., 2016). The original PWT model positioned economic constraints and
marginalization as the two primary contextual factors predicting decent work, and the relation between each of these constructs and decent
work were theorized to be mediated by work volition and career adaptability. The handful of studies to date empirically examining the PWT
have relied on a multitude of variables to capture both economic constraints (e.g., an-nual income, social class, subjective social status,
financial strain) and marginalization (e.g., discrimination, stigma, marginalization, climate) depending on the population at hand (Allan,
Tebbe, Bouchard, & Duffy, 2019; Duffy et al., 2018; Tokar & Kaut, 2018). Work volition, career adaptability, and decent work have been
captured relatively consistently throughout the current body of literature.
In general, these initial PWT studies have demonstrated that indicators of economic constraints, marginalization experiences,
and work volition are each directly and/or indirectly related to decent work (Allan et al., 2019; Duffy et al., 2018; Duffy et al., 2019;
Kozan et al., 2019; Tokar & Kaut, 2018). However, studies are mixed on the role of career adaptability in the model. No studies have
found marginalization to predict career adaptability, and its relationship with economic constraints has been either weak or non-
significant (Allan et al., 2019; Duffy et al., 2018; Duffy et al., 2019; Kozan et al., 2019; Tokar & Kaut, 2018). This has caused some
to question the placement of career adaptability in the model (Duffy et al., 2019).
Thus far, a handful of studies have examined the experiences of sexual and gender minority individuals in the context of PWT.
Douglass, Velez, Conlin, Duffy, and England (2017) examined predictors of decent work in a sample of working adults who identi-
fied as a sexual minority using a cross-sectional design. Douglass and colleagues used social class as a proxy for economic
constraints and heterosexist discrimination experiences as an indicator of marginalization. Additionally, they tested work volition and
career adaptability as mediators. The authors mainly found support for PWT propositions; however, the majority of the non-
significant paths related to career adaptability. Allan et al. (2019) examined a modified version of the PWT model in a sample of
working sexual mi-nority adults using a cross-sectional design. Specifically, the authors hypothesized social class and workplace
climate would predict meaningful work (as opposed to decent work) and included work volition and decent work as mediators of
these relations, thereby removing career adaptability from the model. All paths were supported except for the direct relation between
social class and decent work. Most recently, Tebbe, Allan, and Bell (2019) examined parts of the PWT model in a sample of
transgender and gender non-conforming working adults, again using a cross-sectional design. Most relevant to the present study,
the authors found support for perceived social status and marginalization as predictors of suboptimal employment, which was
mediated by work volition (career adaptability was not tested).
These studies provide evidence that marginalization and economic constraints are consistently related to decent work, which is mediated
by work volition. Specifically, the core tenets of marginalization and economic constraints are consistently related to decent work, and work
volition as a mediator of both of these relations are observed consistently in the literature. Yet, the aforementioned studies have tested either
the original PWT model (with career adaptability included but not functioning as expected), or with sig-nificant alterations to the PWT model
in terms of decent work (e.g., relying on meaningful work or overqualification as the primary outcome variable in place of decent work).
Furthermore, all three aforementioned studies utilized a cross-sectional design. As the PWT is still in its infancy, the present study seeks to
expand the findings of past research by examining the major tenets of the PWT with the exception of psychological ownership in place of
career adaptability, as well as the utilization of a multi-wave design. Fol-lowing Duffy et al.'s (2016) suggestion to use predictors that make
the most sense for the population being studied, our adaptation of the PWT model begins with two predictors, one examining a specific form
of economic constraints (financial strain) and a sec-ond capturing a potential source of marginalization for gender and sexual minority
employees as it relates to their social identity (LGBTQ+ work climate) in the prediction of decent work. We test two potential mediators, the
first focusing on perceived control in work decisions (work volition) and the second examining more general control at work as it relates to
work identity (psychologi

2
R.W. Smith et al. Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

cal ownership) (See Fig. 1). In the following sections we discuss each of these aspects of our model and specific propositions in
further detail.
1.1. Financial strain

PWT posits that economic constraints play a role in the ability of marginalized individuals to secure decent work, which has gen-
erally been supported empirically (Douglass et al., 2017; Tokar & Kaut, 2018). Whereas past research on gender and sexual
minority employees in the context of PWT have focused on social class or social status to capture economic constraints (Allan et al.,
2019; Douglass et al., 2017; Tebbe et al., 2019), examination of PWT in other populations has found support for financial strain as a
valid indicator of economic constraints (Tokar & Kaut, 2018). In the present study, we viewed financial strain as the most appropriate
indi-cator in our model due to potential wage discrepancies in this population. For instance, the fields of sociology and labor
relations have found empirical support for a sexual orientation wage gap (Antecol, Jong, & Steinberger, 2008; Klawitter, 2015; Mize,
2016), with distinct differences in earnings occurring between sexual orientation minorities and heterosexual majority populations.
Furthermore, a significant percentage of transgender workers report being denied a promotion due to their gender identity or
expression and are three times more likely to be unemployed compared with the overall U.S. unemployment rate (James et al.,
2016). Taken together, we seek to replicate past research and hypothesize that greater financial strain will be negatively associated
with the ability to secure decent work (Hypothesis 1).
1.2. Unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate

An aspect of the workplace that may influence the ability of gender and sexual minority individuals to secure decent work is the
work climate. In particular, a supportive LGBTQ+ 1 work climate should foster a feeling of interpersonal safety at work and organiza-
tional values that complement family and social values - two of the core tenets of decent work. This is consistent with meta-analytic
evidence that individuals with concealable stigmas (e.g., gender and sexual orientation) fare worse than individuals with non-con-
cealable stigmas in terms of physical and mental health (Schmitt, Branscombe, Postmes, & Garcia, 2014), potentially due to the
added stress and anxiety over navigating the concealment of their identity. Meta-analytic evidence suggests that a supportive LGBT
climate is associated with work attitudes (⍴ =0.43), reduced psychological strain (⍴ = −0.29), disclosure of one's identity (⍴ =0.56),
and less perceived discrimination (⍴ = −0.69) (Webster, Adams, Maranto, Sawyer, & Thoroughgood, 2018). Unsupportive LGBTQ+
work climates may signal to gender and sexual minority workers that they are not safe, protected, or valued (Brenner, Lyons, &
Fassinger, 2010; Webster et al., 2018), which is evidenced both in their work-related attitudes and experiences. In the context of
PWT, at least one study to date has found support for a significant relation between an unsupportive LGBT work climate and decent
work (b = −0.46; Allan et al., 2019). Thus, in the current study, we expect an unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate will be negatively
asso-ciated with the ability to secure decent work (Hypothesis 2).
Consistent with PWT, we anticipate that financial strain and an unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate will be positively correlated
(Duffy et al., 2016), drawing on past research calling attention to the intersection of economic constraints and marginalization (e.g.,
Cole, 2009; Shields, 2008). Specifically, PWT argues that marginalized individuals with greater economic constraints will be more
likely to work in settings with unhealthy climates, given the reduced job opportunities that result from financial hardship. A recent
study testing the PWT model with a sample of employed women supported this proposition, finding economic constraints and work-
place climate to be significantly, negatively correlated (r = −0.27; England et al., 2019). Thus, we hypothesize that financial strain
and an unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate will be positively correlated (Hypothesis 3).
2. Mediating mechanisms

2.1. Work volition

Work volition is characterized by a person's belief in their ability to make occupational decisions, even when faced with con-
straints (Duffy, Diemer, Perry, Laurenzi, & Torrey, 2012). Thus, PWT posits that work volition should mediate the relations between
both economic constraints and marginalization on decent work. In the context of the current study, we theorize that work volition
may explain the ability of gender and sexual minority individuals facing financial strain and/or an unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate
to overcome these barriers and obtain decent work. Indeed, past research has consistently found support for work volition as a
mediating mechanism in the PWT model (Allan et al., 2019; Douglass et al., 2017; Duffy et al., 2018). Building off this re-search, we
hypothesize that greater financial strain will be negatively associated with work volition (Hypothesis 4) and that a support

1 We intentionally sought to capture both gender and sexual minority workers in our sample and measures (reflected by LGBTQ+ instead of LGB or LGBT).
First, this answers the calls for research to incorporate inclusive conceptualizations relating to gender and sexual identities, including but not limited to fluid and
nonbinary identities (Anderson & Croteau, 2013). Relating to gender/sex, binary conceptualizations (i.e., man/woman, male/female) fail to capture the experiences
of the many individuals who fall outside of these boxes (Hyde, Bigler, Joel, Tate, & van Anders, 2019). Furthermore, there are >50 descriptors of minority sexual
orientations (e.g., see Walton, Lykins, & Bhullar, 2016). Again, limiting our sample to only those in the LGB or LGBT categories would overlook the many
individuals who identify as one of the numerous other sexual or gender minority descriptions.

3
R.W. Smith et al. Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

Fig. 1. Hypothesized theoretical model of the present study and our hypotheses.Note. Climate=Unsupportive LGBTQ+ Work Climate. Psych
Ownership=Psychological Ownership. Hypothesized relationships of indirect effects (Hypotheses 11–14) are not listed.

ive LGBTQ+ work climate (Hypothesis 5) will be positively associated with work volition. We also posit that work volition will be
positively associated with the ability to secure decent work (Hypothesis 6).
2.2. Psychological ownership

Along with using a three-wave panel design, the main unique contribution of the current manuscript is our inclusion of psycholog-
ical ownership as a mediating mechanism. We selected psychological ownership in place of career adaptability for two reasons.
First, similar to career adaptability, psychological ownership is a self-regulatory strength (Dawkins, Tian, Newman, & Martin, 2017;
Duffy et al., 2016). Career adaptability may be viewed as a self-regulation strength in that in times of stress, changes, or challenges,
enables feelings of personal control, confidence, and solving occupational challenges. These adaptive feelings and behaviors may
be viewed as strategies of self-regulation, helping to explain the link between career adaptability and positive outcomes. In a related
vein, psy-chological ownership over one's work may facilitate self-regulation, such that one is open to change, reflects on their
aspirations, and develops occupational goals (Avey, Avolio, Crossley, & Luthans, 2009; Dawkins et al., 2017), likewise explaining
the positive relation-ship between psychological ownership and positive outcomes. Thus, we view psychological ownership as a
highly related yet distinct construct that may be better suited in PWT.
Second, our approach to incorporate psychological ownership into PWT builds on identity threat models of stigma (Crocker et al.,
1998; Major et al., 2002; Steele et al., 2002). Major and O'Brien (2005) proposed that collective representations (i.e., the stigmatized
group's shared understanding of the dominant view of their group), situational cues, and personal characteristics increase the likeli-
hood of stigmatized individuals experiencing stressful identity-threatening situations, which are defined as “threats to the aspect of
self that is derived from membership in a devalued social group or category” (Major & O'Brien, 2005, p. 398; Tajfel & Turner, 1986).
When a threat is a) appraised as dangerous, creates uncertainty, or threatens personal identity and b) there are not enough
resources to overcome the threat, both voluntary (e.g., problem-solving) and involuntary (e.g., anxiety) responses occur (Lazarus &
Folkman, 1984). Aligning with Major and O'Brien's (2005) theoretical approach, we conceptualize economic constraints and
marginalization as two situational cues that signal to LGBTQ+ employees that they are at risk of being discriminated against,
stereotyped negatively, or treated badly because of their social identity. We argue here that hostile climate (i.e., unsupportive
LGBTQ+ work climate and finan-cial strain serve as robust reminders to LGBTQ+ employees that they are part of a marginalized
group at risk of negative stereotypes. Because financial strain and hostile climate are likely to trigger identity threat appraisals, we
expect that employees will experience involuntary and voluntary responses. Voluntary responses include self-regulation strategies,
such as disengaging self-esteem and effort from situations that trigger identity threat (Major & O'Brien, 2005).
One of these voluntary responses is psychological ownership, when people feel as though their work is theirs (Pierce, Kostova, & Dirks,

2001, 2003). The key characteristics of psychological ownership include feelings of possessiveness (Van Dyne & Pierce, 2004

4
R.W. Smith et al. Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

) and that answer the question “What do I feel is mine?” (Brown, Pierce, & Crossley, 2014). These feelings of possessiveness and
being psychologically tied to work enable work to become a part of the extended self (Brown et al., 2014). Feelings of psychological
ownership can be applied to any life domain, including work, family, community, and hobbies. In the current paper, we argue that the
experiences of financial strain and an unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate enable LGBTQ+ employees to feel that their identity is
threatened (Major & O'Brien, 2005), engendering decreased feelings of psychological ownership of work.
In support of our predictions, Pierce et al. (2003) argue that there are specific experiences that enable the development of psycho-logical
ownership: feeling control over the ownership target (e.g., one's job), coming to intimately know the target, and investing the self into the
target. Psychological ownership over one's work cannot develop when an employee fails to feel competent, is unable to connect to the
organization in a way that allows identity exploration with others, and lacks a sense of belonging (Pierce et al., 2001, 2003). We argue that
LGBTQ+ employees are unable to pursue these activities when experiencing discrimination and financial hard-ship, as these experiences
include feeling a lack of control and feeling unaccepted by others (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Schmitt et al., 2014; Tajfel & Turner, 1979;
Verkuyten, 1998; Wirth & Williams, 2009). As such, we hypothesize that greater financial strain will be negatively associated with
psychological ownership (Hypothesis 7), and that an unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate (Hypothesis 8) will be negatively associated with
psychological ownership. We also posit that psychological ownership will be positively associated with the ability to secure decent work
(Hypothesis 9). Akin to PWT propositions, and the link between psychological ownership a sense of control, we also hypothesize that work
volition and psychological ownership will be positively correlated (Hypothesis 10).
Our final four hypotheses concern indirect effects. Based off of the theoretical (Duffy et al., 2016; Major and O'Brien, 2005;
Pierce et al., 2001, 2003) and empirical (e.g., Allan et al., 2019; Crocker et al., 1998; Duffy et al., 2018; Duffy et al., 2019; Kozan et
al., 2019; Tokar & Kaut, 2018) research to date, we hypothesize that having greater financial strain will be indirectly related with a
re-duced ability to secure decent work through the mediating mechanisms of work volition (Hypothesis 11) and psychological
ownership (Hypothesis 12). In a related vein, we hypothesize that experiencing an unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate will be
indirectly related with a reduced ability to secure decent work through the mediating mechanisms of work volition ( Hypothesis 13)
and psychological ownership (Hypothesis 14).
3. The present study

The goal of the present study was to examine predictors of decent work among sexual minority employees using core tenants of
PWT. Additionally, we sought to test an adapted model of PWT by incorporating psychological ownership into our model in place of
one of the original mediators - career adaptability. As career adaptability has been an inconsistent predictor in the PWT model in
past research – both as a predictor of decent work as well as a mediator of contextual variables (Douglass et al., 2017; Duffy et al.,
2018; Tokar & Kaut, 2018) - the use of psychological ownership in the present study may provide initial insights into the utility of
alternative mediator variables. The model will be examined using structural equation modeling with a sample of working adults
surveyed at three time points over a three-week period.
4. Method

4.1. Participants

The final sample consisted of 240 adults employed full-time and living in the United States who identified as a gender or sexual
minority. The average age of participants was 29.02 years old (SD =8.43), and they reported working an average of 34.40 h a week
(SD =13.08). The majority of participants were employed full-time (67.1%), with the remainder being employed part-time. Partici-
pants held jobs in a variety of areas, including office worker (27.1%), professional worker, such as a lawyer, accountant, or teacher
(19.6%), and manager (11.7%), among others. Approximately half (54.2%) held at least a bachelor's degree and 13.8% of
participants reported having children. The frequencies of participants sexual identities were as follows: 58.3% bisexual, 11.7%
lesbian, 11.3% gay, 9.2% queer, 9.6% additional sexual identity not listed (e.g., asexual, pansexual, demisexual, etc.). Regarding
gender identity, 25% of participants identified as male, 63.3% as female, 20.4% as cisgender, 7.1% as transgender, and 9.2% as
additional gender identity not listed (e.g., agender, gender non-conforming, non-binary, etc.). 2 Most of the participants were
Caucasian (75.8%) followed by Hispanic/Latino (14.2%), Asian/Pacific Islander (7.9%), African American (7.5%), Native American or
American Indian (1.7%), and Other (1.7%).3
4.2. Procedure

Data were collected using Prolific Academic (https://prolific.ac/), an online platform connecting researchers and participants.
Participants were allowed to sign up for the study if they met the following criteria: identified as a sexual or gender minority, lived in
the United States, and reported working either part-time or full-time. A total of 305 participants completed the Time 1 sur

2 Percentages sum to >100% as participants were instructed to select all that apply.
3 Percentages sum to >100% as participants were instructed to select all that apply.

5
R.W. Smith et al. Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

vey. One week later, all participants were invited to complete Time 2. Of the 305 participants, 279 completed Time 2. One week
later, the 279 participants who completed both Time 1 and Time 2 were invited to complete Time 3, which was completed by 253 of
the participants. After the completion of each survey, participants were paid $1.75, with the possibility to earn $5.25 for the
completion of all three surveys. Of the 253 participants who completed all three surveys, 12 were removed due to failing one or
more attention checks or failing to complete all of the measures. Additionally, one participant was removed as they reported being
unemployed. Thus, our final sample consisted of 240 participants. Demographics, financial strain, and LGBTQ+ work climate was
measured at Time 1, work volition and psychological ownership were measured at Time 2, and decent work was measured at Time
3. All study procedures were approved by the home university's institutional review board (IRB) (Protocol #E11381).
4.3. Measures

4.3.1. Financial strain

Financial strain was measured using the 4-item financial strain scale by Creed and Macintyre (2001). Example items include “do
you have serious financial worries?” and “are you often not able to do the things you like to do because of shortages of money?”
Items were measured on a 5-point scale (1= never, 5= all of the time). This scale has demonstrated adequate internal consistency
reliability in past research and showed appropriate fit in the PWT (Tokar & Kaut, 2018). In the current sample, the internal
consistency of the financial strain scale was α =0.90.

4.3.2. Unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate

Unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate was measured using the LGBT Climate Inventory (Liddle, Luzzo, Hauenstein, & Schuck,
2004), which measures the formal and informal characteristics of the workplace that shape sexual minorities employees'
experiences on the job. The LGBT Climate Inventory was adapted to capture LGBTQ+ rather than solely LGBT to better understand
individuals who identify as any sexual minority (e.g., pansexual, demisexual, asexual, etc.) or gender minority (e.g., non-binary). The
LGBTQ+ climate inventory consists of 20 items measured on a 4-point scale and includes items that describe a participant's
workplace (1=does not describe at all, 4= describes extremely well). Example items include “LGBTQ+ employees fear job loss
because of sexual orien-tation” and “LGBTQ+ employees feel accepted by coworkers.” This scale has displayed adequate internal
consistency reliability in past research and was correlated in the expected direction with work volition and decent work (Allan et al.,
2019). The measure was scored such that higher scores indicate an unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate. The internal consistency
of the LGBTQ+ climate scale in the current sample was α =0.96.

4.3.3. Work volition

Work volition was measured using the 4-item volition subscale from the 13-item work volition scale by Duffy et al. (2012). Exam-
ple items include “I feel total control over my job choices” and “I can do the kind of work I want, despite external barriers.” Items
were measured on a 7-point scale (1= strongly disagree, 7= strongly agree). In their instrument development study, Duffy et al.
found the 4-item subscale to evidence adequate internal consistency reliability and correlate in the expected directions with career
barriers and experiences of discrimination. Numerous other studies have used this subscale in PWT tests, also finding scores to
evidence good internal consistency reliability (Douglass et al., 2017; Duffy et al., 2018; Duffy et al., 2019; Tokar & Kaut, 2018). The
internal consis-tency of the volition scale scores in the current sample was α =0.91.

4.3.4. Psychological ownership

Psychological ownership was measured using Brown et al.'s (2014) psychological ownership scale, which consists of six items.
Example items include “I feel a very high degree of personal ownership for the work that I do” and “I sense that this job is MINE.”
Items were measured on a 5-point scale (1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree). Past research has demonstrated adequate
internal consistency reliability of this scale (Wang, Demerouti, Le Blanc, & Lu, 2018; Wang, Law, Zhang, Li, & Liang, 2019). While
psycho-logical ownership has not yet been examined in the context of PWT, it is related to relevant constructs such as person-job fit
(Han, Chiang, McConville, & Chiang, 2015) and organization-based self-esteem (Liu, Wang, Hui, & Lee, 2012). The internal
consistency of the psychological ownership scale in the current sample was α =0.95.

4.3.5. Decent work

Decent work was measured using the descent work scale (Duffy et al., 2017), a 15-item measure consisting of five factors (phys-
ically and interpersonally safe working conditions, access to health care, adequate compensation, hours that allow for free time and
rest, and organizational values that complement family and social values). Example items include “I feel physically safe interacting
with people at work” (from the physically and interpersonally safe working conditions factor) and “my employer provides acceptable
options for healthcare” (access to health care factor). Items were measured on a 7-point scale (1= strongly disagree, 7= strongly
agree). The decent work scale has demonstrated adequate internal consistency reliability and correlates in the expected direction
with other PWT constructs in a number of studies (e.g., Allan et al., 2019; Douglass et al., 2017; Duffy et al., 2018; Kozan et al.,
2019). The reliability of the subscales in the current sample were as follows: physically and interpersonally safe working conditions:
α =0.85; access to health care: α =0.97; adequate compensation: α =0.84; hours that allow for free time and rest: α =0.85;
organizational values complement family and social values: α =0.93.

6
R.W. Smith et al. Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

5. Results

5.1. Analyses

Initial data cleaning, descriptive statistics, and correlations (see Table 1) were analyzed using SPSS v. 25. All variables of
interest demonstrated univariate normality, with skewness and kurtosis values <1.0. To test our hypotheses, we utilized structural
equation modeling in Mplus version 8.3 (Muthén & Muthén, 2018) with maximum likelihood estimation. Models were evaluated using
the χ2 test, the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), the comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI),
and the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). Based on past research, we followed the recommendations of using the
following guidelines to indicate adequate fit: RMSEA ≤ 0.10, CFI ≥ 0.90, TLI ≥ 0.90, and SRMR ≤ 0.10 (Bentler & Bonett, 1980;
Weston & Gore Jr, 2006).
5.2. Measurement model

Prior to evaluating hypotheses, we analyzed a measurement model wherein all indicators loaded onto their respective factors. As
with previous research (Douglass et al., 2017), we utilized a bifactor structure to capture decent work, as suggested by the original
authors of the measure (Duffy et al., 2017). Specifically, the bifactor structure includes a general factor of decent work, as well as
domain-specific factors of the facets of decent work (physically and interpersonally safe working conditions, access to health care,
adequate compensation, hours that allow for free time and rest, and organizational values that complement family and social val-
ues). The measurement model showed a good fit to the data: RMSEA=0.058 ([90% CI=0.054, 0.062], CFI=0.914, TLI=0.907,
SRMR=0.053. All indicators loaded onto their respective factors at values of 0.33 or higher.
5.3. Hypothesized structural model

5.3.1. Direct effects

The structural model included all hypothesized pathways (see Fig. 2). Drawing from PWT (Duffy et al., 2016) and past empirical
work on PWT (e.g., Douglass et al., 2017), we allowed financial strain and unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate to correlate, as well
as work volition and psychological ownership. The hypothesized model showed a good fit to the data: RMSEA=0.058 [0.054, 0.062];
CFI=0.913; TLI=0.906; SRMR=0.055. Financial strain (β = −0.30, SE =0.14, p = .036) had a significant direct effect on decent work.
However, unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate did not have a significant direct effect on decent work (β = −0.04, SE =0.18, p = .833).
Financial strain (β = −0.34, SE =0.06, p < .001) and unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate (β = −0.30, SE =0.07, p < .001) significantly
predicted work volition, which in turn significantly predicted decent work (β =0.38, SE =0.11, p < .001). Unsupportive LGBTQ+ work
climate (β = −0.24, SE =0.07, p < .01), but not financial strain (β = −0.09, SE =0.07, p = .188) significantly pre-dicted psychological
ownership, which in turn significantly predicted decent work (β =0.18, SE =0.08, p < .05). Financial strain and unsupportive LGBTQ+
work climate was significantly correlated (r =0.17, p < .05), as were work volition and psychological owner-ship (r =0.31, p < .001).

5.3.2. Indirect effects

Indirect effects were tested with 5000 bias-corrected bootstrap samples. A significant indirect effect is established by a 95% con-
fidence interval that does not include zero. The indirect effect of financial strain to decent work through volition was significant (β =
−0.13, 95% CI [−0.20, −0.04]), as was the indirect effect of unsupportive LGBTQ+ climate on decent work through volition (β =
−0.11, 95% CI [−0.20, −0.03]). However, the indirect effects of financial strain (β = −0.02, 95% CI [−0.05, 0.01]) and unsup-portive
LGBTQ+ work climate (β =0.04, 95% CI [−0.09, 0.004]) on decent work through psychological ownership were not signifi-cant. In
sum, 10 of our 14 hypotheses were supported (Hypotheses 2, 7, 12, and 14 were not; see Fig. 2).

Table 1

Descriptive statistics and correlations among study variables.

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5

1. Financial strain 1.93 1.05 0.90

2. Unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate 2.03 0.72 0.16

0.96

3. Work volition 3.89 1.51 −0.37 −0.34 0.91

4. Psychological ownership 2.50 1.07 −0.12 −0.24 0.34 0.95

5. Decent work 3.42 1.03 −0.46 −0.47 0.50 0.34 0.86

Note. N =240. Reliabilities are reported along the diagonals.
p < .05.
p < .01.
p < .001.

7
R.W. Smith et al. Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

Fig. 2. Hypothesized structural model of relations between variables in the present sample.Note. Climate=Unsupportive LGBTQ+ Work Climate. Psych
Ownership=Psychological Ownership. Values reflect standardized coefficients. Dashed lines indicate non-significant relationships. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

6. Discussion

The purpose of the present study was to explore predictors of access to decent work among a sample of LGBTQ+ working adults using a
PWT lens. Specifically, we advanced research in this area by incorporating a new mediator variable – psychological ownership
– and by utilizing a three-wave panel design to alleviate common method bias and capture the temporal order of model constructs.
In the following discussion we first highlight findings with regard to psychological ownership and then focus on the model results as
a whole.
The existent literature testing PWT has generally supported the central tenets of the theory, with the primary exception being
inconsistent results with the mediating mechanism of career adaptability (e.g., Douglass et al., 2017; Duffy et al., 2018; Tokar &
Kaut, 2018). Drawing on identity threat models of stigma (Crocker et al., 1998; Major et al., 2002; Major & O'Brien, 2005; Steele et
al., 2002) and stress and coping (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), we proposed psychological ownership as possibly a more appropriate
construct to depict the psychological processes that occur for marginalized employees. Our support for this proposition was mixed.
Psychological ownership was predicted by climate, did predict decent work, and was correlated with volition. However, psychologi-
cal ownership was unrelated to financial strain and did not mediate the relationship between climate and decent work. Although we
cannot imply causality with our data, it may be that jobs that allow one to feel ownership are the types of jobs that promote decent
work.
Regarding its relation with climate, one of the main ways that individuals may cope with the negative experiences associated
with an unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate is by engaging in self-regulatory behaviors like disengaging self-esteem and effort from
identity threat domains (Keller & Dauenheimer, 2003; Major & Schmader, 1998; Major and Schmader, 1998, Schmader, Major, &
Gramzow, 2001; Steele, 1997; Stone, 2002). When employees believe they are being treated poorly in vocational contexts (via an
unsupportive LGBTQ+ work climate), they may stop exerting effort and seeking out esteem in their workplaces, as evidenced by the
reduced psychological ownership. This is an important finding in advancing a new idea within PWT, as it suggests that marginalizing
experiences may motivate employees to change their behaviors in the workplace (in addition to changing their career behaviors, as
is suggested by tests of the PWT using career adaptability).
Findings from this study also have implications for PWT research as a whole. Akin to results from previous cross-sectional
studies, work volition predicted decent work over time, was predicted by both financial strain and climate, and partially (financial
strain) or fully (climate) mediated the relation of these variables to decent work. Financial strain at baseline was also a robust, direct
predictor to decent work three weeks later even after accounting for its indirect effect via work volition. These results suggest that
current financial concerns, work volition, and psychological ownership may be particularly important for predicting decent work. It
may be that for LGBTQ+ employees, financial difficulties and a lack of choice serve as critical barriers to decent work access, likely
resulting in the need to take jobs which do not meet all five components of decent work.

8
R.W. Smith et al. Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

6.1. Practical implications

Typically, PWT practical implications have been framed in the context of individual counseling (e.g., Autin et al., 2018; Douglass
et al., 2017; Duffy et al., 2018; Tebbe et al., 2019) and results from the current study further support these previous suggestions,
Specifically, counselors are encouraged to assess not just work satisfaction but the degree to which work is meeting the criteria to
be considered decent. If this threshold is not met, it is critical to discuss factors that may be causing this, which for LGBTQ+
employees may include financial barriers, unsupportive work environments, and/or other factors that are limiting the ability to freely
choose desired occupations. Counselors can then work with clients to address factors that may be more malleable and work
towards helping clients attain decent work.
In addition to these clinical implications, we also want to highlight the relevance of this study and the broader PWT literature for
organizational scholars and managers. For instance, managers should be aware of the impact of a hostile work environment for
gender and sexual minority employees on their work identity, work volition and feelings of psychological ownership. Managers can
encourage employees to feel more psychological ownership over their work by allowing employees to exert control over their work
tasks and helping employees feel competent at work through the use of rewards and praise. Furthermore, the results of the present
study highlight the importance of organizations maintaining a supportive climate for diverse employees, in addition to formal poli-cies
and practices (e.g., organizational anti-discrimination policies). In other words, having formal policies and practices for LGBTQ+
workers should be standard, but it is equally important that an affirming diversity climate is encouraged and maintained.
6.2. Limitations and future directions

As with all research, our study is not without limitations. First, while our study design involved a three-wave panel design, there
remains a need for future research to test PWT with more extensive longitudinal designs (e.g., across years). This is driven by the
fact that, although some constructs in PWT may change over short periods of time (Zacher, 2016), some of the constructs in PWT
are likely relatively stable over time (e.g., decent work). In the current model perceptions of financial strain, unsupportive LGBTQ+
work climate, work volition and psychological ownership may fluctuate weekly, whereas decent work is more stable. Future research
should closely examine how the relationships between the variables in the PWT function over time, particularly regarding causality
and directionality (Duffy et al., 2019).
Additionally, the majority of our sample (58.3%) consisted of individuals who identify as bisexual, with much smaller percent-
ages reflecting other sexual minority identities. Future research should explore potential differences between sexual identities in the
context of the PWT. For instance, differences exist regarding degree of disclosure for bisexual employees compared with gay and
les-bian employees (Arena Jr. & Jones, 2017), as well as disclosure differences between gay and lesbian employees (Ragins,
Cornwell, & Miller, 2003). Furthermore, the majority of our sample (75.8%) was Caucasian, highlighting the need for future research
to examine PWT in more diverse samples. Although beyond the focus of the current study, we encourage future research to
examine the potential intersection of gender and sexual minority identities in relation to decent work, as well as the intersectionality
of other identities (e.g., race) (Anderson & Croteau, 2013; Sawyer, Salter, & Thoroughgood, 2013).
Another potential avenue for research relating to the present study would be to explore PWT in dual-earner couples. Many
sexual minority individuals are likely in a relationship with a partner who is also a sexual minority, who may face similar but also
unique experiences in obtaining decent work. This notion could be extended to examine spillover and crossover processes of stress
relating to the marginalization of sexual minority individuals, their degree of decent work, and its ultimate impact on both their own
stress as well as their partners. This is consistent with past research highlighting the unique stressors faced by sexual minority
employees (Sawyer, Thoroughgood, & Ladge, 2017), which can cross over into the family domain, ultimately influencing their
partner's well-be-ing (Williamson et al., 2017).
Finally, this is the first empirical test of psychological ownership in the PWT model. Future research is needed to confirm our
findings in additional samples, as well as explore whether psychological ownership is a theoretically and empirically appropriate me-
diator in PWT for other marginalized groups. The present study also focuses on the first portion of the PWT model, whereas only a
handful of research to date has examined the outcomes portion of the model (Autin et al., 2019; Kim, Fouad, Maeda, Xie, & Nazan,
2018), or moderators of the model (Tebbe et al., 2019). Consistent with the original conceptualization of PWT (Duffy et al., 2016),
we advocate for future research to carefully consider the population at hand when selecting specific constructs in the context of the
PWT.
6.3. Conclusion

The current study builds upon the original tenants of PWT using a three-wave design in a sample of gender and sexual minority
employees, with the adaptation of psychological ownership as a mediating mechanism in place of career adaptability. The majority
of our hypotheses were supported, providing support for the PWT framework with the incorporation of psychological ownership,
although the mediating effects of psychological ownership were not supported. Specifically, our results suggest that financial strain,
work volition, and psychological ownership all predict access to decent work, and that work volition explains – fully or in part – the
links between financial strain, climate, and decent work. In sum, the present study provides theoretical and empirical insight regard-
ing the nuances of economic constraints and marginalization on the work experiences of gender and sexual minority employees.

9
R.W. Smith et al. Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

Author contribution statement

Rachel Williamson Smith: Conceptualization, methodology, software, formal analysis, investigation, writing
Lisa E. Baranik: Conceptualization, methodology, writing
Ryan D. Duffy: Conceptualization, writing (review and editing)

References

Allan, B.A., Tebbe, E.A., Bouchard, L.M., Duffy, R.D., 2019. Access to decent and meaningful work in a sexual minority population. Journal of Career Assessment
27, 408–421. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072718758064.
Anderson, M.Z., Croteau, J.M., 2013. Toward an inclusive LGBT psychology of working. In: Blustein, D.L. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the psychology of working.
Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 103–126. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199758791.013.0007.
Antecol, H., Jong, A., Steinberger, M., 2008. The sexual orientation wage gap: The role of occupational sorting and human capital. Industrial and Labor Relations
61, 518–543.
Arena Jr., D.F., Jones, K.P., 2017. To “B” or not to “B”: Assessing the disclosure dilemma of bisexual individuals at work. Journal of Vocational Behavior 103, 86–98.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.08.009.
Autin, K.L., Duffy, R.D., Blustein, D.L., Gensmer, N.P., Douglass, R.P., England, J.W., Allan, B.A., 2019. The development and initial validation of need satisfaction
scales within the psychology of working theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology 66, 195–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000323.
Autin, K.L., Duffy, R.D., Jacobson, C.J., Dosani, K.M., Barker, D., Bott, E.M., 2018. Career development among undocumented immigrant young adults: A
psychology of working perspective. Journal of Counseling Psychology 65, 605–617. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000280.
Avey, J.B., Avolio, B.J., Crossley, C.D., Luthans, F., 2009. Psychological ownership: Theoretical extensions, measurement, and relation to work outcomes. Journal
of Organizational Behavior 30, 173–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.583.
Baumeister, R.F., Leary, M.R., 1995. The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin 117, 497–529.
Bentler, P.M., Bonett, D.G., 1980. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin 88, 588–606.
Blustein, D.L., Olle, C., Connors-Kellgren, A., Diamonti, A.J., 2016. Decent work: A psychological perspective. Frontiers in Psychology 7, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.
3389/fpsyg.2016.00407.
Brenner, B.R., Lyons, H.Z., Fassinger, R.E., 2010. Can heterosexism harm organizations? Predicting the perceived organizational citizenship behaviors of gay and
les-bian employees. Career Development Quarterly 58, 321–335.
Brown, G., Pierce, J.L., Crossley, C.D., 2014. Toward an understanding of the development of ownership feelings. Journal of Organizational Behavior 35, 318–338.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1869.
Cole, E.R., 2009. Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist 64, 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014564.
Creed, P.A., Macintyre, S.R., 2001. The relative effects of deprivation of the latent and manifest benefits of employment on the well-being of unemployed people.
Jour-nal of Occupational Health Psychology 6, 324–331. https://doi.org/10.1037//1076-8998.6.4.324.
Crocker, J., Major, B., Steele, C., 1998. Social stigma. In: Fiske, S., Gilbert, D., Lindzey, G. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology. vol. 2, McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA, pp.
504–553.
Dawkins, S., Tian, A.W., Newman, A., Martin, A., 2017. Psychological ownership: A review and research agenda. Journal of Organizational Behavior 38, 163–183.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2057.
Dormann, C., Griffin, M.A., 2015. Optimal time lags in panel studies. Psychological Methods 20, 489–505. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000041.
Douglass, R.P., Velez, B.L., Conlin, S.E., Duffy, R.D., England, J.W., 2017. Examining the psychology of working theory: Decent work among sexual minorities.
Journal of Counseling Psychology 64, 550–559. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000212.
Duffy, R.D., Allan, B.A., England, J.W., Blustein, D.L., Autin, K.L., Douglass, R.P., … Santos, E.J.R., 2017. The development and initial validation of the decent
work scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology 64, 206–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000191.
Duffy, R.D., Blustein, D.L., Diemer, M.A., Autin, K.L., 2016. The psychology of working theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology 63, 127–148. https://doi.org/10.
1037/cou0000140.
Duffy, R.D., Diemer, M.A., Perry, J.C., Laurenzi, C., Torrey, C.L., 2012. The construction and initial validation of the Work Volition Scale. Journal of Vocational
Behav-ior 80, 400–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.04.002.
Duffy, R.D., Gensmer, N., Allan, B.A., Douglass, R.P., England, J.W., Autin, K.L., Blustein, D.L., 2019. Developing, validating, and testing improved measures
within the psychology of working theory. Journal of Vocational Behavior 112, 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.02.012.
Duffy, R.D., Velez, B.L., England, J.W., Autin, K.L., Douglass, R.P., Allan, B.A., Blustein, D.L., 2018. An examination of the psychology of working theory with
racially and ethnically diverse employed adults. Journal of Counseling Psychology 65, 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000247.
England, J.W., Duffy, R.D., Gensmer, N.P., Kim, H.J., Buyukgoze-Kavas, A., Larson-Konar, D.M., 2019. Women attaining decent work: The important role of
workplace climate in Psychology of Working Theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000411, (Advanced online publication).
Grant, J.M., Mottet, L.A., Tanis, J., Harrison, J., Herman, J.L., Keisling, M., 2011. Injustice at every turn: A report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey.
National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, Washington, DC.
Griggs, T.L., Eby, L.T., Maupin, C.K., Conley, K.M., Williamson, R.L., Vande Griek, O.H., Clauson, M.G., 2016. Who are these workers, anyway?. Industrial and
organi-zational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice 9, 114–121. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2015.123.
Han, T.-S., Chiang, H.-H., McConville, D., Chiang, C.-L., 2015. A longitudinal investigation of person-organization fit, person-job fit, and contextual performance:
The mediating role of psychological ownership. Human Performance 28, 425–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2015.1021048.
Hyde, J.S., Bigler, R.S., Joel, D., Tate, C.C., van Anders, S.M., 2019. The future of sex and gender in psychology: Five challenges to the gender binary. American
Psy-chologist 74, 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000307.
James, S.E., Herman, J.L., Rankin, S., Keisling, M., Mottet, L., Anafi, M., 2016. The report of the 2015 U.S. transgender survey. National Center for Transgender
Equal-ity, Washington, DC.
Jones, K.P., King, E.B., 2014. Managing concealable stigmas at work: A review and multilevel model. Journal of Management 40, 1466–1494.
https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0149206313514418.
Keller, J., Dauenheimer, D., 2003. Stereotype threat in the classroom: Dejection mediates the disrupting threat effect on women's math performance. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin 29, 371–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202250218.
Kim, S.Y., Fouad, N., Maeda, H., Xie, H., Nazan, N., 2018. Midlife work and psychological well-being: A test of the psychology of working theory. Journal of Career
Assessment 26, 413–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072717714538.
King, E.B., Mohr, J.J., Peddie, C.I., Jones, K.P., Kendra, M., 2014. Predictors of identity management: An exploratory experience-sampling study of lesbian, gay,
and bisexual workers. Journal of Management 43, 476–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314539350.
Klawitter, M.A., 2015. Meta-analysis of the effects of sexual orientation on earnings. Industrial Relations 54, 4–32.
Kozan, S., Işik, E., Blustein, D.L., 2019. Decent work and well-being among low-income Turkish employees: Testing the psychology of working theory. Journal of
Coun-seling Psychology 66, 317–327. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000342.
Lazarus, R.S., Folkman, S., 1984. Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer, New York.
Liddle, B.J., Luzzo, D.A., Hauenstein, A.L., Schuck, K., 2004. Construction and validation of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered climate inventory.
Journal of Career Assessment 12, 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072703257722.
Liu, J., Wang, H., Hui, C., Lee, C., 2012. Psychological ownership: How having control matters. Journal of Management Studies 49, 869–895.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1467-6486.2011.01028.
Major, B., O'Brien, L.T., 2005. The social psychology of stigma. Annual Review of Psychology 56, 393–421.
R.W. Smith et al. Journal of Vocational Behavior xxx (xxxx) xxx-xxx

Major, B., Quinton, W.J., McCoy, S.K., 2002. Antecedents and consequences of attributions to discrimination: Theoretical and empirical advances. In: Zanna, M.P.
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 251–330.
Major, B., Schmader, T., 1998. Coping with stigma through psychological disengagement. In: Swim, J.K., Stangor, C. (Eds.), Prejudice: The target's perspective.
Acade-mic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 219–241.
Meyer, I.H., 2019. LGB experiences of discrimination. The Williams Institute, Los Angeles, CA, Retrieved from https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/experts/ilan-
meyer/lgb-discrim-experiences/.
Mize, T.D., 2016. Sexual orientation in the labor market. American Sociological Review 81, 1132–1160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122416674025.
Muthén, L.K., Muthén, B.O., 2018. Mplus 8.1 [computer software]. Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CA.
OECD, 2019. Society at a glance 2019: OECD social indicators. OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/soc_glance-2019-en.
Pierce, J.L., Kostova, T., Dirks, K.T., 2001. Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review 26, 298–310.
Pierce, J.L., Kostova, T., Dirks, K.T., 2003. The state of psychological ownership: Integrating and extending a century of research. Review of General Psychology
7, 84–107. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.7.1.84.
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, 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452.
Ragins, B.R., Cornwell, J.M., Miller, J.S., 2003. Heterosexism in the workplace: Do race and gender matter?. Group & Organization Management 28, 45–74.
https:// doi.org/10.1177/1059601102250018.
Ragins, B.R., Singh, R., Cornwell, J.M., 2007. Making the invisible visible: Fear and disclosure of sexual orientation at work. Journal of Applied Psychology 92,
1103–1118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1103.
Rule, N.O., Bjornsdottir, R.T., Tskhay, K.O., Ambady, N., 2016. Subtle perceptions of male sexual orientation influence occupational opportunities. Journal of
Applied Psychology 101, 1687–1704. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000148.
Sawyer, K., Salter, N., Thoroughgood, C., 2013. Studying individual identities is good, but examining intersectionality is better. Industrial and Organizational
Psychol-ogy 6, 80–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/iops.12012.
Sawyer, K.B., Thoroughgood, C., Ladge, J., 2017. Invisible families, invisible conflicts: Examining the added layer of work-family conflict for employees with LGB
fam-ilies. Journal of Vocational Behavior 103, 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.08.004.
Schmader, T., Major, B., Gramzow, R.H., 2001. Coping with ethnic stereotypes in the academic domain: Perceived injustice and psychological disengagement.
Journal of Social Issues 57, 93–111.
Schmitt, M.T., Branscombe, N.R., Postmes, T., Garcia, A., 2014. The consequences of perceived discrimination for psychological well-being: A meta-analytic review.
Psychological Bulletin 140, 921–948. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035754.
Shields, S.A., 2008. Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles 59, 301–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9501-8.
Steele, C.M., 1997. A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist 52, 613–629. https://doi.org/10.1037/
0003-066X.52.6.613.
Steele, C.M., Spencer, S.J., Aronson, J., 2002. Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In: Zanna, M.P. (Ed.),
Advances in experimental social psychology. vol. 34, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 379–440.
Stone, J., 2002. Battling doubt by avoiding practice: The effects of stereotype threat on self-handicapping in white athletes. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin 28, 1667–1678. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616702237648.
Stone-Romero, E.F., Rosopa, P.J., 2008. The relative validity of inferences about mediation as a function of research design characteristics. Organizational
Research Methods 11, 326–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428107300342.
Tajfel, H., Turner, J., 1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: Austin, W., Worchel, S. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations.
Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA, pp. 33–47.
Tajfel, H., Turner, J.C., 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In: Worchel, S., Austin, W.G. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Nelson-
Hall, Chicago, pp. 7–24.
Tebbe, E.A., Allan, B.A., Bell, H.L., 2019. Work and well-being in TGNC adults: The moderating effect of workplace protections. Journal of Counseling Psychology
66, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000308.
The Williams Institute, 2019. Adult LGBT population in the United States. The Williams Institute, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Tokar, D.M., Kaut, K.P., 2018. Predictors of decent work among workers with Chiari malformation: An empirical test of the psychology of working theory. Journal of
Vocational Behavior 106, 126–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.01.002.
Van Dyne, L., Pierce, J.L., 2004. Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: Three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational
citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior 25, 439–459. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.249.
Verkuyten, M., 1998. Perceived discrimination and self-esteem among ethnic minority adolescents. The Journal of Social Psychology 138, 479–493. https://doi.org/10.
1080/00224549809600402.
Walton, M.T., Lykins, A.D., Bhullar, N., 2016. Beyond heterosexual, bisexual, and homosexual: A diversity in sexual identity expression. Archives of Sexual
Behavior 45, 1591–1597. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0778-3.
Wang, H.-J., Demerouti, E., Le Blanc, P., Lu, C.-Q., 2018. Crafting a job in “tough times”: When being proactive is positively related to work attachment. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology 91, 569–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12218.
Wang, D., Jia, Y., Hou, Z.-J., Xu, H., Zhang, H., Guo, X.-L., 2019. A test of psychology of working theory among Chinese urban workers: Examining predictors and
outcomes of decent work. Journal of Vocational Behavior 115, 103325https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103325.
Wang, L., Law, K.S., Zhang, M.J., Li, Y.N., Liang, Y., 2019. It's mine! Psychological ownership of one's job explains positive and negative workplace outcomes of
job engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology 104, 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000337.
Webster, J.R., Adams, G.A., Maranto, C.L., Sawyer, K., Thoroughgood, C., 2018. Workplace contextual supports for LGBT employees: A review, meta-analysis,
and agenda for future research. Human Resource Management 57, 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21873.
Weston, R., Gore Jr, P.A., 2006. A brief guide to structural equation modeling. The Counseling Psychologist 34, 719–751. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006286345.
Williamson, R.L., Beiler-May, A., Locklear, L.R., Clark, M.A., 2017. Bringing home what I'm hiding at work: The impact of sexual orientation disclosure at work for
same-sex couples. Journal of Vocational Behavior 103, 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.08.005.
Wirth, J.H., Williams, K.D., 2009. ‘They don't like our kind’: Consequences of being ostracized while possessing a group membership. Group Processes &
Intergroup Relations 12, 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430208098780.
Zacher, H., 2016. Within-person relationships between daily individual and job characteristics and daily manifestations of career adaptability. Journal of Vocational
Behavior 92, 105–115.

View publication stats