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

net/publication/371081109

Workplace ostracism and cyberloafing: A social cognitive perspective

Article in Management Research Review · May 2023

DOI: 10.1108/MRR-07-2022-0490

CITATIONS READS

0 87

2 authors, including:

Koay Kian Yeik

Sunway University
55 PUBLICATIONS 1,015 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

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

Cyberloafing of ICT Workers in Malaysia View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Koay Kian Yeik on 06 June 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/2040-8269.htm

Workplace
Workplace ostracism and ostracism and
cyberloafing: a social cyberloafing

cognitive perspective
Kian Yeik Koay and Catherine Hui Yi Lai
Department of Marketing Strategy and Innovation, Sunway University,
Bandar Sunway, Malaysia Received 10 July 2022
Revised 18 February 2023
27 April 2023
Accepted 27 May 2023

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to better understand the effect of workplace ostracism on cyberloafing
by examining the mediating effect of moral disengagement. The role of organisational commitment as a
moderator of the association between workplace ostracism and cyberloafing is also examined.
Design/methodology/approach – The proposed hypotheses are tested with survey data collected from
243 employees among public listed companies in Malaysia. Data are analysed using partial least squares
structural equation modelling.
Findings – The results show that workplace ostracism has a significant positive influence on cyberloafing.
Furthermore, it is observed that workplace ostracism serves as a mediating factor in the link between
workplace ostracism and cyberloafing. Finally, organisational commitment is revealed to have no significant
moderating effect on the relationship between workplace ostracism and cyberloafing.
Originality/value – To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to build and test a model
based on social cognitive theory that examines the fundamental mechanisms through which workplace
ostracism influences cyberloafing.
Keywords Cyberloafing, Workplace ostracism, Moral disengagement, Social cognitive theory,
PLS-SEM, Malaysia, Management in practice
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Cyberloafing refers to:
A set of behaviours at work in which an employee engages in electronically-mediated activities,
particularly through the use of the internet, that his or her immediate supervisor would not
consider job-related (Askew et al., 2014, p. 510).
Cyberloafing has become a major source of concern for organisations since employees
frequently lose attention when executing job-related duties, resulting in decreased job
productivity (Koay et al., 2022; Lim and Teo, 2022; Tandon et al., 2022). Sending personal
emails, browsing non-work-related websites and watching online videos are all examples of
cyberloafing behaviour. For instance, it is estimated that cyberloafing costs the USA
roughly US$85bn each year (Wagner et al., 2012). On average, employees spend 2.5 h on
online activities that are completely unrelated to their jobs during office hours (Lufkin and
Mudditt, 2021). According to a poll, 64% of employees surf non-work-related websites

This research is part of the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) (Project ID: FRGS/1/2021/ Management Research Review
SS02/SYUC/03/1) funded by the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia. We are thankful to those © Emerald Publishing Limited
2040-8269
who directly or indirectly contributed to this research. DOI 10.1108/MRR-07-2022-0490
MRR throughout the workday (Salary.com, 2014). Additionally, approximately 36% of young
employees waste approximately 2 h of engagement during office hours on their devices
(Udemy, 2018). As a result, some organisations implement strict internet policies to prohibit
employees from engaging in cyberloafing, while others restrict access to specific websites.
Cyberloafing not only reduces job productivity but also has a variety of negative
implications for both employees and organisations (Koay and Soh, 2018; Tandon et al.,
2022). For instance, when employees spend an excessive amount of time cyberloafing, they
lose not only their overall job productivity but also their job efficiency. This is because
employees require additional time to re-establish work momentum following cyberloafing.
Additionally, cyberloafing can wreak havoc on a company’s network security (Tandon et al.,
2022). Employees, for example, may inadvertently jeopardise a company’s network security
by downloading malicious viruses that enable third parties to steal the company’s valuable
information. In addition, cyberloafing may result in bandwidth degradation. When
employees consume bandwidth for non-work-related online activities, their colleagues may
suffer poor internet speeds, which may have a detrimental impact on their job performance.
Nonetheless, other scholars are rather optimistic about cyberloafing, believing that it has a
beneficial effect on employees’ workplace emotions (Oravec, 2018). For instance,
cyberloafing allows employees to relieve stress (Koay et al., 2017) and gain a sense of control
in the virtual world (Lim et al., 2021). Furthermore, employees’ creativity might be triggered
by surfing non-work-related websites (Rahman et al., 2022).
Previous scholars have attempted to understand the elements that motivate employees to
engage in cyberloafing behaviour using a variety of theoretical lenses. For instance, the
theory of planned behaviour (Sheikh et al., 2015) and the theory of interpersonal behaviour
(Huma et al., 2017; Soh et al., 2016) have both been widely applied to understand
cyberloafing. In brief, those studies found that attitudes, subjective norms and perceived
behavioural control are significant predictors of cyberloafing. Although these two theories
are useful in explaining cyberloafing, they do not offer insights into the influence of
variables related to interpersonal behaviour at work on cyberloafing. This study focuses on
understanding how workplace ostracism influences cyberloafing. Workplace ostracism is
defined as “the extent to which an individual perceives that he or she is ignored or excluded
by others at work” (Ferris et al., 2008, p. 1348). When employees are ostracised by
colleagues, they are more likely to resort to cyberloafing as a coping mechanism. According
to Koay (2018), ostracised employees are more likely to experience emotional exhaustion
during work hours, which eventually drives them to engage in cyberloafing. Employees can
refill psychological resources (defined as entities that hold value in their own right for
individuals) such as psychological capital, self-esteem and perceived control through
cyberloafing (Agarwal and Avey, 2020), hence, alleviating emotional exhaustion. Using
social cognitive theory (SCT), this study proposes an alternate explanation for the
association between workplace ostracism and cyberloafing. It is proposed that workplace
ostracism triggers employees’ moral disengagement, which subsequently motivates them to
indulge in cyberloafing. After experiencing workplace ostracism, employees may no longer
feel guilty about engaging in cyberloafing.
Besides, the positive influence of workplace ostracism on cyberloafing is proposed to be
moderated by organisational commitment. Organisational commitment refers to “the
strength of an individual’s identification with and involvement in a particular organisation”
(Crewson, 1997, p. 507). Loyal employees are less likely to respond negatively when
confronted with interpersonal stress on the job. For instance, Lim et al. (2021) observed that
abusive supervision has a greater positive impact on cyberloafing via emotional exhaustion
in highly dedicated employees. Hence, it is hypothesised that employees who are highly
committed to their organisations have a lower proclivity for cyberloafing as a result of Workplace
workplace ostracism because they will attempt to rectify the situation by repairing social ostracism and
relationships with colleagues and assimilating into the social circle.
The purpose of this study is to understand the effect of workplace ostracism on
cyberloafing
cyberloafing by examining the mediating effect of moral disengagement and the moderating
effect of organisational commitment. The theoretical contributions of this study come from
building on Koay’s (2018) work by offering an alternate explanation for the relationship
between workplace ostracism and cyberloafing based on the mediating influence of moral
disengagement. Furthermore, this study also empirically examines the role of organisational
commitment in moderating the relationship between workplace ostracism and cyberloafing.
Finally, the study offers practical consequences for managers responsible for monitoring
employees’ online activities during work hours.

2. Literature review
2.1 Social cognitive theory
According to SCT, individuals typically act in accordance with their internalised moral
standards (Bandura, 1990, 1999, 2002). However, they can choose to deactivate and
circumvent their internalised moral standards to engage in unethical behaviour. Through
moral disengagement, individuals rationalise their unethical behaviour as justifiable or even
obligatory to overcome their self-sanction mechanism. Moral disengagement refers to “the
process of reconstruing moral judgments (via the application of moral disengagement
mechanisms), with the result that the moral evaluation of a behaviour is changed” (Schaefer
and Bouwmeester, 2021, p. 528). Moral disengagement can be activated through eight
mechanisms, including “moral justification, euphemistic labelling, advantageous
comparison, displacement of responsibility, diffusion of responsibility, disregard or
distortion of consequences, dehumanisation, and attribution of blame” (Eriksson, 2016,
p. 277). This theory has been applied to understand different types of ethical behaviour, such
as cyberbullying (Lo Cricchio et al., 2021), corruption (Zhao et al., 2017), negative workplace
behaviours (Ogunfowora et al., 2022) and digital piracy (Olivero et al., 2019).

2.2 Workplace ostracism and cyberloafing

Workplace ostracism occurs when employees believe they are being ignored or ostracised
by their colleagues (Kanwal et al., 2019; Robinson et al., 2013). Ostracism in the workplace
includes avoiding conversation and eye contact with and ignoring the ostracised individual.
Workplace ostracism is a form of passive aggression, which is more subtle or covert than
abusive supervision and workplace bullying, which are more active and direct. Individuals’
perceptions of workplace ostracism vary. For instance, some employees may perceive their
colleagues’ refusal to ask them for lunch as a type of workplace ostracism, while others may
view it as normal (Williams and Zadro, 2001). Workplace ostracism has various detrimental
repercussions on employees’ mental well-being and job performance. When employees are
ignored or excluded by their coworkers in the workplace, it can make them feel invisible and
question their significance in the organisation, which can be frustrating. Conservation of
resources (COR) theory suggests that engaging in cyberloafing may help prevent further
depletion of their resources by reducing their efforts and performance levels (Hobfoll, 1989,
2002; Leung et al., 2011; Nimmi et al., 2021, 2022). By participating in cyberloafing,
employees can restore their resources, including self-esteem, sense of control and sense of
belongingness (Koay, 2018), which may enhance their overall well-being. Accordingly, this
study puts forward the following hypothesis:
MRR H1. Workplace ostracism has a significant positive influence on cyberloafing.

2.3 Moral disengagement as a mediator

According to SCT, individuals can selectively activate or deactivate their moral
control in a given situation (Bandura, 1990). A self-regulatory system directs an
individual’s behaviour in such a way that it does not violate his or her internal moral
standards (Evans and Karl, 2022; Detert et al., 2008). When an individual is morally
disengaged, he or she will bypass self-sanction and violate personal standards to
perform unethical behaviours without feeling guilty (Newman et al., 2020). Hystad
et al. (2014) discovered that when employees experience a high level of organisational
injustice, they demonstrate a strong proclivity for moral disengagement, increasing
their likelihood of engaging in deviant behaviour. Furthermore, Hiekkataipale and
Lämsä (2019) asserted that ethical culture is an important antecedent of moral
disengagement. Hence, our argument is that workplace ostracism can lead to a
deactivation of employees’ moral self-regulation, which can ultimately result in moral
disengagement. In other words, when employees feel ignored or excluded by their
coworkers, they may be less likely to follow their moral values, leading to a
disconnect between their actions and their moral principles. Therefore, the following
hypothesis is postulated:

H2. Workplace ostracism has a significant positive influence on moral disengagement.

Using SCT and previous research, it is suggested that moral disengagement acts as a
mediator between workplace ostracism and cyberloafing because most employees
view workplace ostracism as inappropriate, and it degrades the exchange
relationships with their organisations (Koay and Lim, 2021). When an employee is
subjected to workplace ostracism, he or she will respond by morally disengaging from
the organisation (Koay, 2018). As a result, employees will engage in one or more of the
eight mechanisms of moral disengagement, including moral justification, euphemistic
labelling, advantageous comparison, displacement of responsibility, diffusion of
responsibility, distortion of consequences, dehumanisation and attribution of blame,
all of which mitigate the negative consequences of cyberloafing for organisations. In
other words, ostracised employees will detach the restraint of self-censure from
cyberloafing (Koay, 2018). For instance, Claybourn (2010) reported that employees
who have a negative perception of their organisations are more likely to be morally
disengaged. When employees show high levels of moral disengagement, they are more
likely to engage in negative work behaviours (Ogunfowora et al., 2022). Similarly,
Valle et al. (2018) demonstrated that abusive supervision results in moral
disengagement, which is followed by organisational deviant behaviour. To put it
simply, we suggest that when employees feel ignored or excluded by their coworkers
in the workplace, they are more likely to deactivate their moral self-regulation, which
subsequently drives employees to engage in cyberloafing behaviour. Therefore, the
following hypotheses are formulated:

H3. Moral disengagement has a significant influence on cyberloafing.

H4. Moral disengagement mediates the relationship between workplace ostracism and
cyberloafing.
2.4 Organisational commitment as a moderator Workplace
This study further proposes organisational commitment as a moderator of the relationship ostracism and
between workplace ostracism and cyberloafing. Employees who display a high level of
organisational commitment are more motivated to assist their organisations in achieving
cyberloafing
their goals and are more productive (Giauque and Varone, 2019). Dedicated employees will
work harder or participate in activities that will assist them to integrate into the
organisation, but less committed employees will react negatively by participating in anti-
social behaviours such as cyberloafing (Koay, 2018). According to this study, the positive
influence of workplace ostracism on cyberloafing is expected to be weaker for committed
employees because they will be proactive in resolving their current workplace situation by
repairing their social relationships with their colleagues instead of engaging in cyberloafing
behaviour as a form of escapism. On the other hand, the positive influence of workplace
ostracism on cyberloafing is projected to be greater for less dedicated employees, who do not
care about their organisations and have a high likelihood of quitting the organisation (Lim
et al., 2021; Vui-Yee and Yen-Hwa, 2020). Hence, upon being subjected to workplace
ostracism, they will make little effort to ascertain the reasons for their exclusion or to rectify
the problem; rather, they will engage in cyberloafing:

H5. Organisational commitment moderates the relationship between workplace

ostracism and cyberloafing, such that the relationship is weaker than when
organisational commitment is high.
Figure 1 illustrates the research model.

3. Methodology
3.1 Sample and data collection
This study targeted employees who work in public listed companies in Malaysia as its
sampling population. An online survey link was shared through personal connections
to reach the desired participants. After completing the survey, respondents were also
requested to share the link with their colleagues to gather a sufficient amount of data.

Figure 1.
Research model
MRR The respondents were not constrained to any particular department or sector within a
company. A total of 243 completed data sets from 46 different companies in a wide
variety of industries were collected. The sample consists of 131 females (53.9%) and 112
males (46.1%). In terms of ethnicity, 201 (82.7%) identify as Chinese, 33 (13.6%) as
Malays, 5 (2.1%) as others and 4 (1.6%) as Indians. According to age statistics, 79
(32.5%) are between the ages of 31 and 40, 62 (25.5%) are between the ages of 41 and 50,
48 (19.8%) are between the ages of 51 and 60, 46 (18.9%) are between the ages of 21 and
30 and 8 (3.3%) are age 61 or older.
This study used a quantitative research technique and a survey method to verify the
postulated theoretical effects between variables. The survey questionnaire was pre-tested on
two academic experts and two PhD students to confirm the scales’ validity. They provided
some minor comments on the wording and instructions. Prior to emailing the respondents
the link to the online survey, necessary adjustments were made. The questionnaire consists
of three sections. The first section includes a cover page displaying all the required
information for the respondents. The second section requires respondents to answer
questions related to the study, whereas the third section solicits respondents’ personal
information.

3.2 Measures
3.2.1 Cyberloafing. The scale used to quantify cyberloafing is mostly based on Lim’s
(2002). However, because the scale was developed in the early 2000s, more components
were added to the scale to better reflect the current cyberloafing phenomenon (Lim and
Teo, 2005). The scale contains 21 items. A sample item included “In general, at work, I
use the Internet to visit entertainment-related websites.” Respondents were asked to
rate each cyberloafing activity on a seven-point rating scale from 1 (never) to 7 (all the
time).
3.2.2 Workplace ostracism. Workplace ostracism was measured using a 10-item scale
developed by Ferris et al. (2008). A sample item includes “At work, others ignored me.” The
response options range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
3.2.3 Moral disengagement. An eight-item scale developed by Moore et al. (2012) was
used to measure moral disengagement. A sample item includes “Taking personal credit for
ideas that were not your own is no big deal.” Respondents indicated their level of agreement
with each statement on a seven-point Likert scale, from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly
agree).
3.2.4 Organisational commitment. Organisational commitment was assessed using a
three-item scale adopted by Giauque and Varone’s (2019). A sample item includes “I am
proud to tell others that I am part of this organisation.” The response options range from 1
(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

3.3 Data analysis process

For several reasons (Hair et al., 2019), partial least squares structural equation
modelling (PLS-SEM) was chosen as the main statistical analysis to validate our
proposed hypotheses. Firstly, being exploratory in nature, this study aims to maximise
the variance in the dependent variable but not to confirm a theory. Secondly, the
complexity of the research model with a mediator and a moderator makes PLS-SEM
suitable for this research. Thirdly, PLS is more flexible in its requirements for data
distribution.
3.4 Common method bias Workplace
When both independent and dependent variables are recorded using the same response ostracism and
method, common method bias (CMB) might pose a major concern for the validity of the
research findings (Baumgartner et al., 2021). Hence, this study employed the full collinearity
cyberloafing
approach (Kock, 2015) and the measured latent marker variable (MLMV) approach to detect
CMB (Chin, 2013). To perform the full-collinearity approach, a dummy variable with random
numbers was first created. Next, a regression analysis was conducted using all variables as
independent variables, which pointed to the dummy variable. The results showed that all
the variance inflation factor values were less than the recommended value of 3.3. Next, to
perform the MLMV test, the regression analysis findings were compared with and without a
measurable marker variable recorded by the general community scale (Amundsen and
Martinsen, 2014). The differences were very minimal; thus, it can be concluded that the CMB
was not a problem.

4. Results
4.1 Measurement model
The measurement model was validated based on its reliability (defined as the extent to
which indicators measuring the same construct are associated with each other), convergent
validity (defined as the extent to which items in a particular measure converge to represent
the underlying construct) and discriminant validity (defined as the extent to which the
constructs are distinct from each other within a given model) (Hair et al., 2019). Firstly,
reliability was assessed by examining Cronbach’s alpha (CA) and composite reliability (CR)
values. Table 1 shows that all CA and CR values were greater than the recommended value
of 0.7. Specifically, the CA values ranged from 0.897 to 0.970, whereas the CR values ranged
from 0.917 to 0.974.
Next, although some factor loadings were less than 0.7, their respective constructs’
average variance extracted (AVE) values were greater than 0.5. Hence, convergent validity
was not an issue of concern. Finally, discriminant validity was evaluated using the Fornell–
Larcker approach and the Heterotrait-Monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT) approach. As
seen in Table 2, the square root of AVE (shown on the diagonal) for each construct was
greater than the related inter-construct correlations (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
Furthermore, Table 3 shows that all HTMT values were less than 0.85 (Henseler et al., 2015).
Based on the evidence, discriminant validity was not a problem.

4.2 Structural model

The significance of path coefficients was validated using a bootstrapping procedure with
5,000 resamples (Table 4). The results showed that workplace ostracism has a significant
positive influence on cyberloafing (b = 0.138, p < 0.05, f 2 = 0.015), supporting H1.
Furthermore, it was found that workplace ostracism has a significant positive influence on
moral engagement (b = 0.503, p < 0.001, f 2 = 0.339), supporting H2. Next, moral
disengagement has a significant positive influence on cyberloafing (b = 0.270, p < 0.001,
f 2 = 0.061), supporting H3. Results of the indirect effect using the bias-corrected bootstrapped
95% confidence intervals are reported in Table 5 (Nitzl et al., 2016). The results suggested
that moral disengagement was a significant mediator of the relationship between workplace
ostracism and cyberloafing (indirect effect = 0.136, bias-corrected confidence interval = LB:
0.064; UB: 0.223), supporting H4. Using the two-stage approach, the interaction term
(workplace ostracism*organisational commitment) was created and tested. There was no
evidence for organisational commitment moderating the relationship between workplace
ostracism and cyberloafing. Hence, H5 was not supported.
MRR Composite Average variance
Construct Item Loading Cronbach’s alpha reliability extracted (AVE)

Cyberloafing CL11 0.805 0.944 0.950 0.502

CL12 0.701
CL13 0.643
CL14 0.720
CL15 0.772
CL16 0.615
CL17 0.789
CL18 0.779
CL19 0.780
CL2 0.577
CL20 0.646
CL21 0.722
CL1 0.575
CL3 0.570
CL4 0.788
CL5 0.734
CL6 0.606
CL8 0.761
CL9 0.793
Moral disengagement MD1 0.741 0.897 0.917 0.581
MD2 0.728
MD3 0.844
MD4 0.648
MD5 0.748
MD6 0.818
MD7 0.816
MD8 0.737
Organisational commitment OC1 0.947 0.935 0.958 0.883
OC2 0.936
OC3 0.936
Workplace ostracism WO1 0.899 0.970 0.974 0.790
WO10 0.770
WO2 0.901
WO3 0.896
WO4 0.831
WO5 0.941
WO6 0.913
WO7 0.921
WO8 0.899
WO9 0.902
Table 1.
Measurement model Source: Created by authors

5. Discussion
5.1 Theoretical contributions
This study established a significant positive relationship between workplace ostracism and
cyberloafing, indicating that ostracised employees are more likely to engage in cyberloafing
behaviour, which is consistent with Koay’s (2018) findings. The experience of workplace
ostracism can drain an employee’s personal resources, causing them to compensate by
engaging in cyberloafing activities. When employees are ostracised, they tend to have weak
social connections with their colleagues, which can lead to low levels of self-esteem and
social control (Wu et al., 2016). This can make it challenging for them to express their Workplace
emotions or concerns with others. However, by participating in cyberloafing, they may feel ostracism and
like they are regaining some sense of control and self-esteem (Koay, 2018), which aligns with
the COR theory.
cyberloafing
According to SCT, an individual can choose to deactivate and circumvent their
internalised moral standards to engage in unethical behaviour. The results of this study
supported the fact that workplace ostracism is a significant trigger that deactivates
employees’ self-regulatory process (Koay, 2018), thereby causing them to engage in
cyberloafing behaviour. This finding is consistent with Valle et al. (2018), who demonstrated
that abusive supervision results in moral disengagement, which then results in knowledge

Construct 1 2 3 4

1. Cyberloafing 0.709
2. Moral disengagement 0.350 0.762
3. Organisational commitment –0.141 –0.300 0.940
4. Workplace ostracism 0.274 0.503 –0.166 0.889

Note: Values on the diagonal (italicised) represent the square root of the average variance extracted while Table 2.
the off-diagonals are correlations The Fornell–Larcker
Source: Created by authors criterion

Construct 1 2 3 4

1. Cyberloafing
2. Moral disengagement 0.339
3. Organisational commitment 0.146 0.321
4. Workplace ostracism 0.265 0.531 0.177
Table 3.
Source: Created by authors The HTMT criterion

Path Standard
Hypothesis coefficient error t value p-value [5.0%; 95.0%] Supported? f2

H1: Workplace ostracism ! 0.138 0.080 1.713 0.043 [0.006, 0.268] Yes 0.015
Cyberloafing
H2: Workplace ostracism ! 0.503 0.056 9.023 0.000 [0.416, 0.599] Yes 0.339
Moral disengagement
H3: Moral disengagement ! 0.270 0.072 3.756 0.000 [0.155, 0.390] Yes 0.061
Cyberloafing
Organisational commitment ! –0.038 0.075 0.511 0.305 [0.168, 0.066] 0.001
Cyberloafing
H5: Ostracism*Commitment ! 0.024 0.070 0.349 0.364 [0.091, 0.138] No
Cyberloafing
Table 4.
Note: One-tailed test Structural model
Source: Created by authors results
MRR hiding. Furthermore, Xu et al. (2020) reported that ostracised employees tend to exhibit
lower levels of emotional obligation. If an employee experiences exclusion from their
colleagues in the workplace, they may feel rejected, disheartened and powerless. These
emotions could lead them to stop following moral guidelines for their behaviour, which
could result in engaging in cyberloafing activities.
Finally, organisational commitment was found to have no significant moderating effect
on the relationship between workplace ostracism and cyberloafing. The outcome is
surprising because it is assumed that committed employees would attempt to improve their
inclusionary status in the workplace (Giauque and Varone, 2019) and so would refrain from
cyberloafing when ostracised (Lim et al., 2021). One possible explanation is that committed
employees may not perceive workplace ostracism as a major issue. Instead, they devote
additional effort to accomplishing given duties and reaching organisational goals.
Furthermore, less committed employees are no longer troubled by workplace ostracism (Lim
et al., 2021), and thus, refrain from engaging in cyberloafing behaviour in retaliation against
their employers. Instead, they will be more likely to leave their respective organisations.

5.2 Managerial and policy contributions

Workplace ostracism causes mental pain akin to physical pain for employees (Williams,
2009). Ostracised employees also show a higher tendency to engage in cyberloafing
behaviour through moral engagement. Literature on workplace ostracism also reports that
workplace ostracism leads to various undesirable workplace behaviours such as knowledge
hoarding (Khalid et al., 2020), knowledge hiding (Zhao et al., 2016) and organisational
deviant behaviours (Valle et al., 2018). Hence, organisations should have a zero-tolerance
policy on workplace ostracism by imposing penalties on ostracisers. Moreover,
organisations should establish a proper channel for those who wish to report workplace
ostracism. Furthermore, leaders set an example for their subordinates and emphasise the
value of teamwork. Most importantly, organisations have to ensure that the existing
promotion process and reward system are fair and transparent. The reward system should
place a premium on team success so that when employees’ incentives are linked, they are
more likely to assist one another rather than regard others as competitors. Fostering a
pleasant workplace free of ostracism will not motivate employees to be morally disengaged,
lowering their likelihood of indulging in cyberloafing behaviour.

6. Limitations and future research

Despite the merits of this study, several limitations need to be highlighted. Firstly, this study
did not collect data at different time points because cross-sectional studies may not be able
to establish a true cause-and-effect relationship. Secondly, CMB could be another potential
issue in this research, so future scholars may consider using a multi-wave longitudinal
design for data collection. Thirdly, inquiring into respondents’ cyberloafing behaviour may

Indirect Standard
Relationship effect error t value p-value [5.0%;95.0%] Supported?

H4: Workplace ostracism ! Moral 0.136 0.041 3.302 0.001 [0.064, 0.223] Yes
disengagement ! Cyberloafing
Table 5.
Mediating effect Note: Two-tailed test
results Source: Created by authors
be prone to social desirability bias, with the result that respondents may under-report their Workplace
cyberloafing behaviour. Hence, future studies may wish to monitor employees’ actual ostracism and
cyberloafing behaviours and keep track of the hours spent. Fourthly, future studies can cyberloafing
propose other mediators to better understand the relationship between workplace ostracism
and cyberloafing from another theoretical perspective. Finally, in this study, data were
gathered using a snowball sampling technique, which is recognised as having limitations in
terms of generalisability. As a result, future researchers may wish to use a probability
sampling method to collect data.

7. Conclusion
Extending Koay’s (2018) work, this study used SCT to provide an alternative theoretical
explanation for the relationship between workplace ostracism and cyberloafing. Specifically,
it was discovered that workplace ostracism is a significant predictor of cyberloafing.
Furthermore, moral disengagement mediates the relationship between workplace ostracism
and cyberloafing.

References
Agarwal, U.A. and Avey, J.B. (2020), “Abusive supervisors and employees who cyberloaf”, Internet
Research, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 789-809.
Amundsen, S. and Martinsen, Ø.L. (2014), “Empowering leadership: construct clarification,
conceptualization, and validation of a new scale”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 3,
pp. 487-511.
Askew, K., Buckner, J.E., Taing, M.U., Ilie, A., Bauer, J.A. and Coovert, M.D. (2014), “Explaining
cyberloafing: the role of the theory of planned behaviour”, Computers in Human Behavior,
Vol. 36, pp. 510-519.
Bandura, A. (1990), “Selective activation and disengagement of moral control”, Journal of Social Issues,
Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 27-46.
Bandura, A. (1999), “Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities”, Personality and Social
Psychology Review, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 193-209.
Bandura, A. (2002), “Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency”, Journal of Moral
Education, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 101-119.
Baumgartner, H., Weijters, B. and Pieters, R. (2021), “The biasing effect of common method variance:
some clarifications”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 221-235.
Chin, W.W., Thatcher, J.B., Wright, R.T. and Steel, D. (2013), “Controlling for common method variance
in pls analysis: the measured latent marker variable approach”, in Abdi, H., Chin, W.W, Esposito
Vinzi, V., Russolillo, G. and Trinchera, L. (Eds), New Perspectives in Partial Least Squares and
Related Methods, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 231-239.
Claybourn, M. (2010), “Relationships between moral disengagement, work characteristics and
workplace harassment”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 100 No. 2, pp. 283-301.
Crewson, P.E. (1997), “Public-service motivation: building empirical evidence of incidence and effect”,
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 499-518.
Detert, J.R., Treviño, L.K. and Sweitzer, V.L. (2008), “Moral disengagement in ethical decision
making: a study of antecedents and outcomes”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 93
No. 2, pp. 374-391.
Eriksson, D. (2016), “The role of moral disengagement in supply chain management research”,
European Business Review, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 274-284.
MRR Evans, R. and Karl, K.A. (2022), “Is helicopter parenting stifling moral courage and promoting moral
disengagement? Implications for the training and development of millennial managers”,
Management Research Review, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 700-714.
Ferris, D.L., Brown, D.J., Berry, J.W. and Lian, H. (2008), “The development and validation of the
workplace ostracism scale”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 93 No. 6, pp. 1348-1366.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error: algebra and statistics”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 382-388.
Giauque, D. and Varone, F. (2019), “Work opportunities and organizational commitment in
international organizations”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 79 No. 3, pp. 343-354.
Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2019), “When to use and how to report the results of
PLS-SEM”, European Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 2-24.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in
variance-based structural equation modelling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135.
Hiekkataipale, M.M. and Lämsä, A. (2019), “(A)moral agents in organizations? The signifcance of
ethical organization culture for Middle managers’ exercise of moral agency in ethical problems”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 155 No. 1, pp. 147-161.
Hobfoll, S.E. (1989), “Conservation of resources: a new attempt at conceptualizing stress”, American
Psychologist, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 513-524.
Hobfoll, S.E. (2002), “Social and psychological resources and adaptation”, Review of General Psychology,
Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 307-324.
Huma, Z.-., Hussain, S., Thurasamy, R. and Malik, M.I. (2017), “Determinants of cyberloafing: a
comparative study of a public and private sector organization”, Internet Research, Vol. 27 No. 1,
pp. 97-117.
Hystad, S.W., Mearns, K.J. and Eid, J. (2014), “Moral disengagement as a mechanism between
perceptions of organizational injustice and deviant work behaviors”, Safety Science, Vol. 68,
pp. 138-145.
Kanwal, I., Lodhi, R.N. and Kashif, M. (2019), “Leadership styles and workplace ostracism among
frontline employees”, Management Research Review, Vol. 42 No. 8, pp. 991-1013.
Khalid, B., Iqbal, R. and Hashmi, S.D. (2020), “Impact of workplace ostracism on knowledge hoarding:
mediating role of defensive silence and moderating role of experiential avoidance”, Future
Business Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, p. 39.
Koay, K.Y. (2018), “Workplace ostracism and cyberloafing: a moderated-mediation model”, Internet
Research, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 1122-1141.
Koay, K.Y. and Lim, P.K. (2021), “Ethical leadership and knowledge hiding: testing the mediating and
moderating mechanisms”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 574-591.
Koay, K.Y. and Soh, C.H. (2018), “Should cyberloafing be allowed in the workplace?”, Human Resource
Management International Digest, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 4-6.
Koay, K.Y., Lim, V.K.G., Soh, P.C.H., Ong, D.L.T., Ho, S.Y. and Lim, P.K. (2022), “Abusive supervision
and cyberloafing: a moderated moderation model of moral disengagement and negative
reciprocity beliefs”, Information and Management, Vol. 59 No. 2, p. 103600.
Koay, K.Y., Soh, P.C. and Chew, K.W. (2017), “Do employees’ private demands lead to cyberloafing?: the
mediating role of job stress”, Management Research Review, Vol. 40 No. 9, pp. 1025-1038.
Kock, N. (2015), “Common method bias in PLS-SEM: a full collinearity assessment approach”,
International Journal of e-Collaboration, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 1-10.
Leung, A.S.M., Wu, L.Z., Chen, Y.Y. and Young, M.N. (2011), “The impact of workplace ostracism in Workplace
service organizations”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 4,
pp. 836-844.
ostracism and
Lim, V.K.G. (2002), “The IT way of loafing on the job: cyberloafing, neutralizing, and organizational
cyberloafing
justice”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 675-694.
Lim, V.K. and Teo, T.S. (2022), “Cyberloafing: a review and research agenda”, Applied Psychology.
ahead-of-Print No. ahead-of-Print.
Lim, V.K.G. and Teo, T.S.H. (2005), “Prevalence, perceived seriousness, justification, and regulation of
cyberloafing in Singapore: an exploratory study”, Information and Management, Vol. 42 No. 8,
pp. 1081-1093.
Lim, P.K., Koay, K.Y. and Chong, W.Y. (2021), “The effects of abusive supervision, emotional
exhaustion and organizational commitment on cyberloafing: a moderated mediation
examination”, Internet Research, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 497-518.
Lo Cricchio, M.G., García-Poole, C., Te Brinke, L.W., Bianchi, D. and Menesini, E. (2021), “Moral
disengagement and cyberbullying involvement: a systematic review”, European Journal of
Developmental Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 271-311.
Lufkin, B. and Mudditt, J. (2021), “The case for a shorter workweek”, available at: www.bbc.com/
worklife/article/20210819-the-case-for-a-shorter-workweek
Moore, C., Detert, J.R., Klebe Treviño, L., Baker, V.L. and Mayer, D.M. (2012), “Why employees do bad
things: moral disengagement and unethical organizational behavior”, Personnel Psychology,
Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 1-48.
Newman, A., Le, H., North-Samardzic, A. and Cohen, M. (2020), “Moral disengagement at work: a
review and research agenda”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 167 No. 3, pp. 535-570.
Nimmi, P.M., Joseph, G. and Donald, W.E. (2022), “Is it all about perception? A sustainability viewpoint
on psychological capital and life well-being of management graduates”, Higher Education, Skills
and Work-Based Learning, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 384-398.
Nimmi, P.M., Kuriakose, V., Donald, W.E. and Muhammed Nowfal, S. (2021), “HERO elements of
psychological capital: fostering career sustainability via resource caravans”, Australian Journal
of Career Development, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 199-210.
Nitzl, C., Roldan, J.L. and Cepeda, G. (2016), “Mediation analysis in partial least squares path modeling:
helping researchers discuss more sophisticated models”, Industrial Management and Data
Systems, Vol. 116 No. 9, pp. 1849-1864.
Ogunfowora, B.T., Nguyen, V.Q., Steel, P. and Hwang, C.C. (2022), “A meta-analytic investigation of the
antecedents, theoretical correlates, and consequences of moral disengagement at work”, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 107 No. 5, pp. 746-775.
Olivero, N., Greco, A., Annoni, A.M., Steca, P. and Lowry, P.B. (2019), “Does opportunity make the thief?
abilities and moral disengagement in illegal downloading”, Behaviour and Information
Technology, Vol. 38 No. 12, pp. 1273-1289.
Oravec, J.A. (2018), “Cyberloafing and constructive recreation”, in Mehdi Khosrow-Pour, D.B.A. (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, 4th ed. IGI Global, Hershey, PA,
pp. 4316-4325.
Rahman, M.F.W., Kistyanto, A. and Surjanti, J. (2022), “Does cyberloafing and person-organization fit
affect employee performance? The mediating role of innovative work behavior”, Global Business
and Organizational Excellence, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 44-64.
Robinson, S.L., O’Reilly, J. and Wang, W. (2013), “Invisible at work: an integrated model of workplace
ostracism”, Journal of Management, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 203-231.
Salary.com (2014), “2014 Wasting time at work survey”, available at: www.salary.com/chronicles/2014-
wasting-time-at-work/
MRR Schaefer, U. and Bouwmeester, O. (2021), “Reconceptualizing moral disengagement as a process:
transcending overly liberal and overly conservative practice in the field”, Journal of Business
Ethics, Vol. 172 No. 3, pp. 525-543.
Sheikh, A., Atashgah, M.S. and Adibzadegan, M. (2015), “The antecedents of cyberloafing: a case study
in an iranian copper industry”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 51, pp. 172-179.
Soh, P.C., Chew, K.W., Ojo, A.O. and Koay, K.Y. (2016), “Extending theory of interpersonal behavior for
cyberloafing to work and private demands”, Information, Vol. 19 No. 9, pp. 4115-4122.
Tandon, A., Kaur, P., Ruparel, N., Islam, J.U. and Dhir, A. (2022), “Cyberloafing and cyberslacking in
the workplace: systematic literature review of past achievements and future promises”, Internet
Research, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 55-89.
Udemy (2018), “Workplace distraction report”, available at: https://research.udemy.com/research_
report/udemy-depth-2018-workplace-distractionreport
Valle, M., Kacmar, K.M., Zivnuska, S. and Harting, T. (2018), “Abusive supervision, leader-member
exchange, and moral disengagement: a moderated-mediation model of organizational deviance”,
The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 159 No. 3, pp. 299-312.
Vui-Yee, K. and Yen-Hwa, T. (2020), “When does ostracism lead to turnover intention? The moderated
mediation model of job stress and job autonomy”, IIMB Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 3,
pp. 238-248.
Wagner, D.T., Barnes, C.M., Lim, V.K.G. and Ferris, D.L. (2012), “Lost sleep and cyberloafing: evidence
from the laboratory and a daylight saving time quasi-experiment”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 97 No. 5, pp. 1068-1076.
Williams, K.D. (2009), “Ostracism: a temporal need-threat model”, in Zanna, M.P. (Ed.), Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology, Academic Press, New York, NY, pp. 279-314.
Williams, K.D. and Zadro, L. (2001), “Ostracism: on being ignored, excluded, and rejected”, In Leary, M.
R. (Ed.), Interpersonal Rejection, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 21-53.
Wu, C.-H., Liu, J., Kwan, H.K. and Lee, C. (2016), “Why and when workplace ostracism inhibits
organizational citizenship behaviors: an organizational identification perspective”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 101 No. 3, pp. 362-378.
Xu, X., Kwan, H.K. and Li, M. (2020), “Experiencing workplace ostracism with loss of engagement”,
Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 35 Nos 7/8, pp. 617-630.
Zhao, H., Xia, Q., He, P., Sheard, G. and Wan, P. (2016), “Workplace ostracism and knowledge hiding in
service organizations”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 59, pp. 84-94.
Zhao, H., Zhang, H. and Xu, Y. (2017), “Effects of perceived descriptive norms on corrupt intention: the
mediating role of moral disengagement”, International Journal of Psychology, Vol. 54 No. 1,
pp. 93-101.

Further reading
Stokel-Walker, C. (2020), “We all cyberloaf – and the science says that it can make us more productive
at work. But when does a useful break become plain old slacking off?”, available at: www.bbc.
com/worklife/article/20200206-cyberloafing-the-line-between-rejuvenating-and-wasting-time

Corresponding author
Kian Yeik Koay can be contacted at: koaydarren@hotmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats