Does workplace ostracismce lead to counterproductive work behavior in healthcare employees: the role of transactional and relational psychological contract breach

Sabir, Muhammad Rizwan; Majid, Muhammad Bilal; Aslam, Muhammad Zia; Rehman, Abdul; Rehman, Sumaira Article Does workplace ostracismce lead to counterproductive work behavior in healthcare employees: the role of transactional and relational psychological contract breach Cogent Business & Management Provided in Cooperation with: Taylor & Francis Group Suggested Citation: Sabir, Muhammad Rizwan; Majid, Muhammad Bilal; Aslam, Muhammad Zia; Rehman, Abdul; Rehman, Sumaira (2024) : Does workplace ostracismce lead to counterproductive work behavior in healthcare employees: the role of transactional and relational psychological contract breach, Cogent Business & Management, ISSN 2331-1975, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, Vol. 11, Iss. 1, pp. 1-19, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2325337 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/326136 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Cogent Business & Management ISSN: 2331-1975 (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/oabm20 Does workplace ostracismce lead to counterproductive work behavior in healthcare employees: the role of transactional and relational psychological contract breach Muhammad Rizwan Sabir, Muhammad Bilal Majid, Muhammad Zia Aslam, Abdul Rehman & Sumaira Rehman To cite this article: Muhammad Rizwan Sabir, Muhammad Bilal Majid, Muhammad Zia Aslam, Abdul Rehman & Sumaira Rehman (2024) Does workplace ostracismce lead to counterproductive work behavior in healthcare employees: the role of transactional and relational psychological contract breach, Cogent Business & Management, 11:1, 2325337, DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2024.2325337 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2325337 © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 20 Mar 2024. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1799 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oabm20 ManageMent | ReseaRch aRticle Cogent Business & ManageMent 2024, VoL. 11, no. 1, 2325337 Does workplace ostracismce lead to counterproductive work behavior in healthcare employees: the role of transactional and relational psychological contract breach Muhammad Rizwan sabira, Muhammad Bilal Majida, Muhammad Zia aslama, abdul Rehmanb and sumaira Rehmanb aFaculty of Business and Management sciences, the superior university, Lahore, Pakistan; bthe superior university, Lahore, Pakistan ABSTRACT With the presence of negative organizational behaviors, not only is the employee’s productivity and job satisfaction affected, but the entire organizational performance of employees also declines. Workplace ostracism affects employees’ psychological well-being by fostering exhaustion of their emotional, psychological, and material resources, significantly influencing counterproductive work behavior. the present research also addresses the emerging negative workplace behaviors by studying the mediation of transactional and relational psychological contract breaches. the research has adopted a ‘quantitative research design’ followed by a survey approach to collect data from Pakistan’s healthcare sector employees. 420 questionnaires were disbursed among employees, of which 350 were received back, and 332 questionnaires were finalized after data cleaning and screening. smart-Pls was used to analyze data and assess the association among different variables. Different tests were performed including the descriptive summary, validity (convergent and discriminant), model fitness and path analysis. Results indicated that WOc significantly impacts cWB. RPcB also significantly influences the cWB. tPcB insignificantly effects cWB and WOc significantly influences RPcB and tPcB. Mediation of tPs has been insignificant, whereas the mediation of RPs has resulted as significant. the present research holds considerable theoretical and practical importance as it provides practical insights to the managerial bodies of the healthcare sector in Pakistan to make strategies for vanishing such counterproductive work behaviors of employees that damage the morale and mental peace of other workers. the limitations of this research have also been addressed in the last section. IMPACT STATEMENT this research examined how workplace ostracism leads to counterproductive work behaviors in healthcare employees in Pakistan, mediated by relational and transactional psychological contract breaches. a quantitative survey collected data from 350 employees, with 332 used after screening. analysis with smartPls tested associations between workplace ostracism, contract breaches, and counterproductive behavior. Results showed workplace ostracism significantly impacted counterproductive behavior. Relational contract breach mediated this relationship, while transactional breach did not. the findings contribute theoretically by linking workplace ostracism to counterproductive behaviors through psychological contract violations. Practically, they suggest reducing ostracism and relational contract breaches to curb counterproductive behaviors in healthcare organizations. limitations include the cross-sectional design and sampling from one sector in one region. Further research could use experimental, longitudinal approaches and more diverse samples. Overall, this highlights the need to address emerging negative behaviors like ostracism to maintain positive psychological contracts and productive work environments. © 2024 the author(s). Published by informa uK Limited, trading as taylor & Francis group CONTACT Muhammad Rizwan sabir [email protected]om Faculty of Business and Management sciences, the superior university, Lahore, Pakistan https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2325337 this is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. the terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent. ARTICLE HISTORY Received 22 June 2023 Revised 16 February 2024 accepted 20 February 2024 KEYWORDS Workplace ostracism; counterproductive work behavior; psychological contract breach; transactional contract breach REVIEWING EDITOR len tiu Wright; De Montfort University Faculty of Business and law, UK SUBJECTS Psychological science; Mental health; Business, Management and accounting 2 M. R. saBiR etal. 1. Introduction counterproductive work behaviors (cWBs) refer to any action employees engage in to harm their company and company members (Pletzer, 2021; spector & Fox, 2002). examples of such behavior that are identified as counterproductive include sabotage, drug abuse, employee theft, and aggression. On the basis of the nature of such behaviors, it is evident that numerous empirical evidence indicates their negative consequence on the well-being of organizational members (Bowling & gruys, 2010). cWBs are examined as a common workplace deviance that highlights the negative work behavior of employees and becomes a significant cause of disadvantageous effects on individual and organizational outcomes (Kundi & Badar, 2021). counterproductive work behaviors (cWBs) are detrimental to an organization and its members, and includes actions like drug and alcohol abuse, aggression, employee theft and sabotage. considerable empirical evidence supports the idea that each kind of cWB that is studied has significant negative consequences for supporting organizations. this study diverges from mainstream thinking by studying Workplace Ostracism (WO) as a possible root cause for cWBs specifically in the context of the health care sector in Pakistan. the vast number of empirical studies in existing literature focuses on forecasting of cWBs as a way to examine why individuals are involved in such behaviors and what measures can be taken to mitigate its impact on organizational performance (Kelloway etal., 2010), which illustrates the partial explanation of the broad range of organizational behavior (cohen & Diamant, 2019). in this accordance, theory and research mainly focus on the deviation of employees while neglecting the managerial and organizational factors, which is a notable cause of developing cWBs. this study has been conducted to explore workplace ostracism among employees and how it is associated with counterproductive workplace behavior (cWB). WO, marked by exclusion and neglect, is recognized as a potent and distressing phenomenon (gamian-Wilk & Madeja-Bien, 2021). the researcher identified the existing gap and used this opportunity to indicate workplace ostracism as a significant determinant of cWBs, increasing employees’ negative behavior and enhancing their deviant work behavior. the theoretical model of this research paper examines that the impact of WO is likely to increase cWBs in employees, which triggers employees to retaliate. this study has started out by examining the literature on cWBs by looking into the relevant journals and checking to see if any new pieces of empirical or theoretical work have been done in the area. Furthermore, to address this research gap, a theoretical model is proposed, exploring the direct impact of WO on cWBs while considering the mediating role of transactional and relational psychological contract breach. Psychological contract breach (PcB), linked to job insecurity, is investigated as a potential mediator in the association between WO and cWBs, given the fact that psychological contract breach (PcB) partially enhance the job insecurity of employees (Ma et al., 2019). taking all this together, contributing to existing literature, this research also considers the unique context of the healthcare sector in Pakistan. this study provides a more comprehensive examination of cWBs within the broader healthcare context. the other novel contribution of this paper is the context of the geographical location and sector in which this study is conducted (i.e. the health care sector of Pakistan), as only one dimension of this sector (nursing staff) has been examined by attaullah & afsar (2021). given the significant threats cWBs pose to organizational performance in the healthcare sector of Pakistan, this study addresses the pressing need for understanding determinants – WO, transactional psychological contract breach, and relational psychological contract breach – that manifest in cWBs. 2.Theoretical framework and hypothesis development 2.1. Workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behavior Ostracism is the extent to which a person is ostracized or neglected by others in a job or organization (howard etal., 2020). as far as ostracism is concerned, several studies, specifically in sociology, education, and psychology, have discovered that one of the most distinct, powerful, and regular occurrences in human life is ostracism. it is the same as a physical injury as indicated by FMRi (‘Functional Magnetic Resonance imaging’). On the other hand, when people are faced with ostracism it is quite common to cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 3 say that they experience psychological distress, impaired cognitive function, and becomes aggressive towards others (Mao et al., 2018). however, behavior and workplace ostracism are generally interconnected as they highlight the potential outcomes of ostracism in the workplace (hitlan & noel, 2009). Withdrawal is a common result of people experiencing ostracism in the workplace. employees may become demotivated by the lack of interaction and become less engaged in their work and more disengaged from their colleagues. this can also influence the productivity of the organisation. Furthermore, some employees may retaliate or involve themselves in counterproductive behaviors to seek revenge or attention. Besides, job dissatisfaction arises due to ostracism (Yang & treadway, 2018). the individual sense of belonging may erode due to ignorance and exclusion, affecting the work fulfillment targets. cWB can be manifested due to this dissatisfaction as employees tend to express their unhappiness and frustration through it. the norms of equity and fairness usually get violated by ostracism happening at the workplace, and employees do not get the opportunity to participate in social interactions (gürlek, 2021). negative emotions, resentment, and anger can be fostered by perceived injustice which may fuel cWB. employees may engage in acts like theft, sabotage, and spreading rumors in order to retaliate against the individuals when they experience ostracism. individuals’ self-esteem and social identity get threatened by ostracism. individuals tend to seek ways in order to restore their worth (Yan et al., 2014). Many individuals’ resort to cWB to regain their influence and perceived status by gaining attention and asserting power. negative behaviors are normalized in an environment where ostracism exists, creating a toxic environment. a cycle of counterproductive actions is perpetuated within organizations through this social influence. Organizations need to foster a respectful and inclusive culture to address workplace ostracism. the likelihood of employees resorting to cWB, and the occurrence of ostracism can be lessened through collaboration, communication, and fairness within organizations. the social exchange theory suggests that employees with negative experiences of workplace ostracism may engage in counterproductive work behavior as a form of retaliation toward supervisors or participate in another way that they feel evens out the mistreatment received. the social exchange theory assumes that individuals have the tendency to bargain and exchange reciprocities in their work relationship (stafford & Kuiper, 2021). therefore, negative experiences of ostracism in working environment deviate from threshold of this reciprocity, and may have an impact on counterproductive behaviors in order to regulate the imbalances felt. h1: Workplace ostracism positively influences counterproductive work behavior. 2.2. Workplace ostracism and transactional psychological contract breach Ostracism, characterized by exclusion and neglect from the workplace, has significant implications for the employer-employee psychological contract (ali awad & Mohamed el sayed, 2023). specifically, the psychological contract is an exchange process between the employer and employee that includes the employee’s perception of mutual obligations and expectations of the parties involved (ali, 2020). transactional psychological contract breach capture violations of perceived transactional terms related to rewards, job security and performance feedback. according to studies conducted by Bari et al. (2023), the role of workplace ostracism factors considerably into the correlate of transactional psychological contract breaches. When employees undergo ostracism, they are more prone to an increase in perceive violation of principles of social exchange, leading them to feel an intensification of transactional contract breaches (Kim & Jo, 2022). Once employees feel ostracized they are most likely to have emotions of breach transactional promises of fair treatment, recognition, and in terms of psychological rewards (Robinson, 2019). Bari et al. (2023) identifies relational ostracism as a cause of a contract breach. When employees see themselves as targets of ostracism, it will be an interpretation of the violation of transactional agreement for fair and equitable treatment by organizational authorities (Robinson, 2019). Furthermore, the absence of legitimate explanations or an understanding of the causes of ostracism, also serves to strengthen the link between ostracism and perceived breach of transactional obligations (gamian-Wilk & Madeja-Bien, 2021). the lack of trust and perceived injustice associated with ostracism also links to perceived breach of transactional obligations (Jahanzeb et al., 2022). consistent with the 4 M. R. saBiR etal. predictions of social exchange theory, this reasoning is based on the belief that workplace ostracism may cause feelings of violated obligations of a transactional nature in the psychological contract. individuals who experience ostracism may interpret the act of being ignored as a breach of the promises or expectations made within the social exchange in relation to job security, favorable work conditions, and rewards (Qadir et al., 2021). according to the principles of social exchange, when individuals perceive obligations in the workplace relationship as having been violated, they may view this violation as a breach of the economic or transactional psychological contract, which has resulted in a failure in the mutually expected reciprocal exchanges (Memon & ghani, 2020). consequently, the following hypothesis can be formulated: h2: Workplace ostracism positively influences transactional psychological contract breach. 2.3. Workplace ostracism and relational psychological contract breach Relational psychological contract breach specifically, refers to the perceived violation of the socio-emotional aspects of the employment, including trust, support and organizational justice (tufan & Wendt, 2020). the interactive effects of workplace ostracism and relational psychological contract breach must be considered as an important issue to the social exchange process related to psychological contract breach, examining how social exclusion impacts upon wider psychological contract i.e. the nature of exchange between employees and the organization. the correlation between workplace ostracism and relational psychological contract breach is defined by a lot of studies (Bari et al., 2023; chen & song, 2019; Khan etal., 2021). according to Zhao etal. (2019), workplace ostracism is associated with relational psychological contract breach, whereby employees that have been ostracized, they will tend to feel there is a breach in the unspoken terms regarding emotional support and interpersonal fairness. Ostracism is a relational event as it occurs between a perceiver and a target (Pelliccio & Walker, 2022). When employees who perceived relational psychological contract breach are ostracized, they interpret the exclusionary behaviors as violative of the mutual understanding about fair treatment, respect and caring (Robinson, 2019). the place of emotional trust and security in the workplace can be impaired by the relational aspects of the psychological contract when individuals experience exclusion (arasli et al., 2019). the emotional distress that comes with being ostracized, such as psychological distress and aggression, also contributes to relational misconduct which contributes to the breach (Bhatti etal., 2023). Based on the social exchange theory perspective, it suggests that experiences of workplace ostracism will result in perceptions of relational psychological contract breach. Ones’ experiences workplace of ostracism the psychological contract underpins many of the core principles of social exchange which include trust, support and interpersonal fairness. thus, this can be hypothesized that: h3: Workplace ostracism positively influences relational psychological contract breach. 2.4. Transactional psychological contract and counterproductive work behavior transactional psychological contract breach refers to the violation from the perception of employees regarding specific employment deal of situational and explicit terms containing structural electronic terms, performance feedback, rewards and job security (topa et al., 2022). there are several empirical studies in multiple frameworks reporting significant positive impact of transactional psychological contract breach on counterproductive work behavior (Bari etal., 2022; Ma etal., 2019; Protsiuk, 2019). When employees perceive a breach in transactional obligations (e.g. unfair treatment, lack of recognition, inadequate rewards), they are likely to enact in counterproductive work behavior in reactive, and sometimes as a coping mechanism (adekanmbi, 2019). counterproductive work behaviors as the result of a transactional breach lead to feelings of dissatisfaction, frustration and disillusionment by employees (Kim & Jo, 2022). these feelings, in turn, provide a vulnerable ground on which counterproductive behaviors begins to emerge. Because individuals perceive a breach in the fair exchange clause in the transactional contract, they will typically proceed to sabotage and/or theft, or in some cases aggression in order to restore, control or influence over their workplace (low etal., 2021). this hypothesis is in agree with social exchange theory that employees who perceived a breach in their transactional obligations such as unfair cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 5 treatment, lack of recognition, and inadequate rewards may activate their cWB as a response or coping mechanism (Witten, 2019). to elaborate this theory, employees in their workplace use to engage their self in a social exchange where they expect for fair and reciprocal treatment (cross & Dundon, 2019). thus, this can be hypothesized that: h4: transactional psychological contract breach positively influences counterproductive work behavior. 2.5. Transactional psychological contract and counterproductive work behaviour the dynamic interplay between relational psychological contract breach and counterproductive work behavior can provoke interest to explore the socio-emotional aspects of the employment relationship dynamics which influence employee’s action on deviant at workplace (griep et al., 2020). Relational psychological contract breach represents where the employee they feel that their employer has violate socio-emotional aspects of the contract such as for example organizational justice, organizational trust and organizational support (Faruk, 2019). an employee who perceives a relational breach in the psychological contract, through the loss of trust, support and fairness, is more likely to respond with counterproductive work behavior, because emotion disturbance is most driven by relational psychological contract breach (estreder et al., 2020). a relational breach in the psychological contract makes an employee feel betrayed, unjustly treated, and emotionally distressed, which is a perfect context for counterproductive behaviour to arise (gulzar et al., 2021). employee seeking to experience emotional equity are most likely to enact counterproductive work behaviours that include; sabotage, spreading rumours, and interpersonal aggression (Witten, 2019). Furthermore, workplace ostracism to causes people to split the psychological contract that they have created while they were employed there and this breach also won’t allow people to perform their best when it comes to their daily tasks. the relational dynamics that are interrupted by ostracism may further contribute to cWB, but this is another issue that needs to be looked at in the future (Zappalà et al., 2022). a breach to the social and emotional aspects at work leads valuable condition to become dissatisfied and to engage in deviant actions (azeem et al., 2020). Furthermore, work place ostracism influenced on counterproductive work behaviour through relational psychological contract breach is a sign of the intricacy of employees’ responses to relational psychological contract breach when social and emotional aspects are violated at work (coyle-shapiro et al., 2019). according to the social exchange theory, when employees foresee a violation in socio-emotional psychological contracts such as: trust, support, and fairness, it may produce counterproductive work behavior (griep etal., 2020). employees are in a reciprocated social exchange in the work place and they may expect to be treated fairly and supported with social contracts (cross & Dundon, 2019). When the emotional reciprocity is violated in the relationship psychological contract, employees may display counterproductive work behavior as an indicator of betrayal, injustice, and resignation in the breach of social and emotional psychological contracts. the social and emotional psychological contract increases the possibility of counterproductive work behavior such as sabotage, rumors, and interpersonal aggression as individuals might try to restore equity of emotional at work (Mapira et al., 2023). thus, this can be hypothesized that: h5: Relational Psychological contract breach positively influences counterproductive work behavior. 2.6. Mediation of transactional psychological contract breach the perceived violation of implicit and explicit promises specifically made between the organization and employees in terms of employment is called a ‘transactional Psychological contract Breach.’ it generally occurs when employees cannot fulfill their obligations with respect to their organizations (agarwal & gupta, 2018). this may involve failure to provide a supportive work environment, career advancement opportunities, or fair compensation. By breaching the relationship between employer and employees, clear conditions appear in terms of cWB. it has been noted that the relationship between ‘workplace ostracism’ and ‘counterproductive behavior’ seems to be mediated and affected by a ‘transactional psychological contract breach.’ in terms of workplace ostracism, it has been observed that ‘transactional Psychological contract Behavior’ acts as a catalyst as it gives rise to cWB (Jafri, 2011). employees tend 6 M. R. saBiR etal. to involve themselves in such actions as their obligations and expectations fail to be fulfilled by the organizations (Montes & irving, 2008). employees tend to retaliate and engage in such actions to seek justice and retribution. also, employees tend to view cWB as their only way to regain power, express their dissatisfaction as well as regain their expectations (Zagenczyk et al., 2011). Moreover, increased perceptions of tPcB can be due to ‘Workplace Ostracism’. employees may perceive this behavior as violence against their fair treatment and expectations due to feeling ignored and excluded. Furthermore, these feelings of tPcB may exacerbate the negative feelings particularly related to ostracism. it may intensify the likelihood of involving in cWB. tPcB can shape the perceptions of employees. an environment related to negative behaviors gets ignited when employees tend to breach the rules of the environment. in response to ‘WO,’ such behaviors tend to be ignited by the normalization of tPcB (astrove et al., 2015). transaction psychological contract breach may also negatively impact employees’ commitment. the commitment and loyalty of employees towards their organization get affected due to it. this arises reduced organizational commitment and the possibility of cWB involvement. employees are normally complemented to play their part in the effectiveness of the organization. the trust between organizations and employees gets undermined due to transactional psychological contract breaches (atkinson, 2007). employees become willing to engage and cooperate in positive organizational behaviors when employees tend to breach (chan, 2021). Furthermore, the trust between the organization and employee relationship gets affected, which enhances the likelihood of involving in cWB as a means of self-interest. the negative emotions weaken organizational commitment and get intensified by the perception of tPcB. thus, organizations need to focus much on positive psychological contracts and mitigate the occurrence of cWB. social exchange theory is a further reason this study has been brought into light as it out lines that the relationship amid workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behavior is moderated through the means of transactional psychological contract violation. according to the social exchange theory, employees have a cooperative relationship with the organization they are a part of based on equitable treatment and the fulfillment of both implicit and explicit agreements (Paolillo et al., 2021). thus, the mediation effect thus being further discussed is that’s the more the workplace ostracism goes on, the more the employees perceive transaction psychological contract violation, the more negative emotion they will perform and the less commitment they will commit. thus, it can be hypothesized that: h6: transactional psychological contract breach positively mediates between workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behaviour. 2.7. Mediation of relational psychological contract breach as far as RPcB is concerned, it generally occurs when employees perceive violence in terms of relational obligations. it can be violence in terms of support, trust, respect, or their relationship. however, a breach can occur by violating the relational expectations and undermining the relationship quality between supervisor and subordinate (Bari, Khan, et al., 2023). Many studies have found that RPcB mediates between these factors through the degradation of trust. employees’ faith in their organization and supervisors is eroded by abusive supervision. as a result, when confronted with workplace ostracism, employees tend to see a breach in their relationship commitments, which may lead to a trust breakdown. On the other hand, their hostile work environment was formed by a lack of trust, which may lead to employees engaging in cWB. Furthermore, RPcB influences the normative attitudes of employers. employees typically believe the organization is not meeting their commitments and become involved in various cWB-related activities. however, negative sentiments and distress is generated through RPcB. By comprehending the mediating role of RPcB, organizations can interpret the significance of promoting trust and subordinate relationships (Montes & irving, 2008). Moreover, a ‘Relational psychological contract breach’ appears to mediate and alter the link between workplace ostracism and unproductive behavior. it has been discovered that ‘Relational Psychological contract Behaviour’ significantly influences workplace ostracism through giving birth to cWB. however, employees often react and engage in such acts in order to seek justice and revenge (salazar-Fierro & Bayardo, 2015). Furthermore, employees tend to see cWB as their only means of regaining authority, expressing unhappiness, cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 7 and regaining their expectations. Furthermore, heightened perceptions of RPcB may be linked to ‘Workplace Ostracism.’ When social exclusion occurs to an individual it is no surprise that that individual tends to experience some sort of psychological distress, impaired cognitive function or aggression toward oneself or to others. thus, RPcB sentiments may enhance negative sensations, particularly those associated with ostracism (atkinson, 2007). it may increase the probability of being involved in cWB. RPcB can affect employee perceptions. When employees violate the environment’s norms, an environment conducive to undesirable behavior is created. RPcB impacts employees’ passion and loyalty to their organization (aggarwal & Bhargava, 2010). this leads to decreased organizational commitment and increases the possibility of involvement in cWB. employees are typically encouraged to contribute to the organization’s success. negative emotions undermine organizational commitment and are exacerbated by RPcB perception. social exchange theory can be linked to this relation as a possible theoretical framework. Based on cost-benefit analysis, this theory proposes that individuals tend to engage in social interactions (li & Yu, 2017). Mutual obligations and expectations are outlined by the psychological contracts within an organization, as referred to by this theory (Birtch et al., 2016). a positive outcome is observed when these expectations are fulfilled, which fosters commitment, trust, and cooperation. still, when there is a breach in that psychological contract, an imbalance between these factors is observed, which tends to give rise to negative outcomes and a desire to restore equity (Madden et al., 2017). employees may tend to face isolation and exclusion in this context of workplace ostracism due to a breach of the psychological contract. this is usually observed in terms of fair treatment and social support. in this perspective, this study proposes social exchange theory as a viable framework for investigating the intervening mechanism, which rests on breach in the relational psychological contract in the mediation between workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behavior. When holding up the causal mechanism of social exchange theory, individuals engage in behavior or engage in relationship within the organization based on underlying condition attributed to psychological contracts that are embedded within the social relationship and interactions (Knapp et al., 2020). in light of social exchanges, this can be hypothesized that: h7: Relational psychological contract breach positively mediates between workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behavior. Figure 1 shows Research framework. 3. Methods 3.1. Participants and procedure For data collection, we have adopted an online survey research strategy. One of the most common methods of data collection is a survey (Vitrano et al., 2021). corresponding to the research aims and objectives along with the main idea of this study, the employees of healthcare sector were selected as the target audience. therefore, the respondents of our study’s survey were the health sector employees. the first author of our study took in-charge of the data collection. the author contacted health sector employees via email. he informed them about the study’s purpose and asked them to partake in the survey. it was ensured that we collected the data from the most relevant target population to ensure the validity, authenticity, and quality of the responses. after one week of taking their consent, we sent them an invitation to complete the questionnaire via google forms. the invitation was sent through Figure 1. Research framework. 14 M. R. saBiR etal. and relational psychological contract breach. the behavior of employees at the workplace is often affected by how the employee is treated at the workplace. if the employee is treated well and is appreciated, the employee will try to put more effort towards the tasks as a result of that good treatment. But if the employee is not treated well or feels cornered at the workplace, it will start reflecting in their behavior, negatively impacting employees’ productivity (imran et al., 2023). Our study proposed seven hypothesized associations that have been tested through the implementation of statistical techniques. it also proposed that transactional and relational psychological contract breach mediate the relationship between workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behavior. Our study has identified that workplace ostracism influences the counterproductive work behavior of employees. the reason behind this relationship and influence is very clear. Many studies have reported how workplace ostracism can destroy an employee’s productivity and behavior. Because activities of workplace ostracism harm not only the employee’s mental health but also productivity as the employee feels excluded and cornered from important decisions (Zaman et al., 2021). such activities can provoke the rebellious thoughts of employees most of the time. Many employees feel such things to be unbearable as it harms their self-esteem and self-respect. especially the feeling of being left out of the important matters of the organization makes a person more rigid (haldorai et al., 2020). Our study suggests that this all ultimately affects the performance and productivity of an employee. it also causes the employee to have a counter behavior which may not seem good to the management. the study has also tested the relationship between WOc and tPcB which has resulted to be significant. these findings also complement the studies discussed in section 2. this is because when an individual experiences ostracism they feel disconnected from their colleagues and organization (sabir et al., 2024). as a result, their job satisfaction, motivation and commitment also decline (Manninen etal., 2023). consequently, a breach in transactional contract might be observed by such employees due to unfair treatment at workplace. Our findings have also supported a significant association between WOc and its impact on RPcB. these findings complement the research undertaken by (Bari etal., 2023; nasir etal., 2023; Rai & agarwal, 2017). RPcB also resulted to be significantly influence the cWB. these findings support the research findings of (griep et al., 2023; griep & Vantilborgh, 2018; li & chen, 2018). however, these psychological contract breeches undermine the trust of employees in an organization and negatively influence their performance. consequently, their willingness to reciprocate with efforts which are beyond their basic job duties is also influenced. Mediation of tPcB resulted to be insignificant between WOc and cWB. But the mediation of RPcB resulted to be significant between WOc and cWB. these findings complement the research of Bari, Khan, et al. (2023). in this way, RPcB serves as a mechanism through which WOc results in cWB. 6.Theoretical implications there are certain implications of this research study. First, our research study contributes to the existing literature. the reason is the variables used in this study. Few studies discuss workplace ostracism, counterproductive work behavior, transactional psychological contract breach, and relational psychological contract breach. second, as our study is an empirical study, it also contributes to the empirical evidence. the results of our study can provide more strength to the existing empirical evidence. third, the current research study provides a very elaborate research framework. it includes information about the relationship between the variables. it provides insight into the propositions that our study has made. it will help understand the relationship between variables. Fourth, our research study provides the empirical results and model. this can help build a theory as it tests the different propositions. Fifth, our research study has used workplace ostracism as the independent variable and counterproductive work behavior as the Table 11. Mediation analysis. original sample (o) sample mean (M) standard deviation (stDeV) t statistics (|o/stDeV|) P values WoC -> RPCB -> CWB 0.274 0.276 0.031 8.713 0 WoC -> tPCB -> CWB 0.025 0.025 0.038 0.669 0.503 abbreviation: WoC = workplace ostracism, CWB = counterproductive work behavior, tPCB = transactional psychological contract breach, RPCB = relational psychological contract breach. cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 15 dependent variable. it means the research study examines the direct relationship between workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behavior. as many studies have not worked on this, discussing these variables can be a great opportunity. another theoretical implication related to this is the use of transactional psychological contract breach and relational psychological contract breach as the mediating role. 7. Practical implications Our research study shows a huge impact of workplace ostracism on the counterproductive work behavior of employees. For this reason, the study has certain implications for practice. these implications are towards the sector, organization, managers, and employees. First, there are some great implications for managers as managers are one of the most important people within the organization. it is a fact leitão et al. (2022) that if managers create such an environment that can appreciate the hard work of the employee or point out the mistake of an employee rather than staking the self-esteem, it will make the employee’s behavior much better. this will benefit not only the employee and manager but also the organization. second, this study also has implications for the organization. Organizations can have an idea about how much productivity or behavior of the employee can be affected by the ostracism activities of the management. this will help the organization to see how to handle such problems. third, there are implications of this study for the employees too. the employees are the ones that perform the tasks and report to authorities. if they are not treated well, it will cause an outrage. employees can have certain ways to handle the situation when there is workplace ostracism. sometimes reporting to the higher authorities may help. it can help the employees to see how they can withstand such situations. Fourth, it has implications for the healthcare sector and its authorities for considering this situation. 8. Limitations and future research indications the work done in this research study also has a few limitations which provides a directed way toward future research. First, future researchers should use the time-series data to see if there is any difference in results by collecting data at two different points in time. this is because the current research study has used cross-sectional data, which may cause common method bias. it can also be problematic as such factors might affect the results between two points. second, the researchers should conduct further studies in developed countries to see how they cope with these issues or how the results change. Our research study was conducted in Pakistan, a developing country and may already have some organizational issues. this study has also used the healthcare sector for this study. Future research should be conducted in other sectors. third, future researchers should collect data from other populations and may choose a different sampling method. Fourth, the data collection method, such as face-to-face or online interviews, can also be used in future research as the current research study has used a survey questionnaire which might not feel extremely reliable. similarly, for data analysis, the researchers can use techniques like Regression or Multi-Regression rather than structural equation Modeling and aMOs like this study. For future studies, researchers can use regression as the technique of analysis. they can also use structural equation Modeling aMOs. Fifth, the current research has used no moderator in this study. For future research, variables like al harbi et al. (2019), leadership, training, etc., can be used as mediating or moderating variables. similarly, factors such as self-respect and self-esteem takhsha et al. (2020) can also be used as the dependent variables to see how workplace ostracism can affect employees. also, the effect of supervision can be seen in the counterproductive work behavior of employees. 9. Conclusion the current research study presents a framework that discusses the relationship between workplace ostracism and the counterproductive work behavior of employees. this study is conducted in the health sector of Pakistan. it also examined the mediating role of transactional psychological contract breach and 16 M. R. saBiR etal. relational psychological contract breach. through the implementation of statistical techniques in accordance with smart-Pls, the researcher has performed data analysis. Our study shows that workplace ostracism has a great influence on the counterproductive work behavior of employees. RPcB also resulted to be significantly influencing cWB, WOc significantly effects RPcB, WOc also resulted to be significantly affect tPcB. it also proved that a transactional psychological contract breach does not mediate the relationship between workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behavior of the employees. another relationship being tested in this research paper is whether the relational psychological contract breach mediates the relationship between workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behavior of the employees or not. this proposition is also proved right, which means it mediates the relationship. the study describes how bad the effect of workplace ostracism, such as excluding the employee from important meetings, events, decisions, etc., can be for the employee. it not only affects an employee’s job but also causes the employee to have an outrage and emotional outburst towards others. such a study provides insight into how workplace ostracism causes counterproductive work behavior in the employees and why employees behave in a certain way after being victims of such a thing. this study has implications for employees, sectors, organizations, and managers to better understand the consequences of not controlling the workplace ostracism activities within the organization. Disclosure statement no potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). About the authors Muhammad Rizwan Sabir is an PhD scholar in Business administration from the superior University lahore, Pakistan. his area of interests are human behavior, human resource management and Organizational Behavior. currently, he is working as Deputy Director in cybercrime Wing, Federal investigation agency (Fia), Pakistan. Muhammad Bilal Majid earned his PhD in Business Management from Malaysia. currently, he is working as an assistant Professor at the superior University, lahore, Pakistan. his area of interest are brand management, consumer psychology. marketing management and general management. Muhammad Zia Aslam earned his PhD in Management from University of Malaya, Malaysia. currently, he is working as an assistant Professor at the superior University, lahore, Pakistan. his area of interest are general management, organizational behavior and human resource management. Abdul Rehman earned his PhD in human Resource Management from UK. currently, he is serving as an chairman at the superior University, lahore, Pakistan. his area of interest are human resource management, leadership and organizational behavior. Sumaira Rehman earned her PhD in entrepreneurship from UK. currently, she is serving as an Rector at the superior University, lahore, Pakistan. her area of interest are entrepreneurship, leadership and work force diversity. References adekanmbi, F. P. (2019). Influence of leadership styles, psychological contract breach and work stress on workplace deviant behaviours. University of Johannesburg. agarwal, U. a., & gupta, R. K. (2018). examining the nature and effects of psychological contract: case study of an indian organization. Thunderbird International Business Review, 60(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.21870 aggarwal, U., & Bhargava, s. (2010). Predictors and outcomes of relational and transactional psychological contract. Psychological Studies, 55(3), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-010-0033-2 al harbi, J. a., alarifi, s., & Mosbah, a. (2019). transformation leadership and creativity: effects of employees pyschological empowerment and intrinsic motivation. Personnel Review, 48(5), 1082–1099. https://doi.org/10.1108/ PR-11-2017-0354 ali awad, n. h., & Mohamed el sayed, B. K. (2023). Post cOViD-19 workplace ostracism and counterproductive behaviors: Moral leadership. Nursing Ethics, 30(7-8), 990–1002. https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330231169935 cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 17 ali, h. (2020). Mutuality or mutual dependence in the psychological contract: a power perspective. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 42(1), 125–148. https://doi.org/10.1108/eR-09-2017-0221 arasli, h., arici, h. e., & Çakmakoğlu arici, n. (2019). Workplace favouritism, psychological contract violation and turnover intention: Moderating roles of authentic leadership and job insecurity climate. German Journal of Human Resource Management: Zeitschrift Für Personalforschung, 33(3), 197–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/23970022 19839896 astrove, s. l., Yang, J., Kraimer, M., & Wayne, s. J. (2015). Psychological contract breach and counterproductive work behavior: a moderated mediation model. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2015(1), 11094. https://doi. org/10.5465/ambpp.2015.11094abstract atkinson, c. (2007). trust and the psychological contract. Employee Relations, 29(3), 227–246. https://doi. org/10.1108/01425450710741720 attaullah, M., & afsar, B. (2021). Workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behaviors in the healthcare sector: a moderated mediation analysis of job stress and emotional intelligence. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, 10(1), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.17708/DRMJ.2021.v10n01a05 azeem, M. U., Bajwa, s. U., shahzad, K., & aslam, h. (2020). Psychological contract violation and turnover intention: the role of job dissatisfaction and work disengagement. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 42(6), 1291– 1308. https://doi.org/10.1108/eR-09-2019-0372 Bari, M. W., abrar, M., Fanchen, M., & Qurrah-tul-ain. (2022). employees’ responses to psychological contract breach: the mediating role of organizational cynicism. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 43(2), 810–829. https://doi. org/10.1177/0143831X20958478 Bari, M. W., Khan, Q., & Waqas, a. (2023). Person related workplace bullying and knowledge hiding behaviors: Relational psychological contract breach as an underlying mechanism. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(5), 1299–1318. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2021-0766 Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, s. l. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.3.349 Bhatti, s. h., hussain, M., santoro, g., & culasso, F. (2023). the impact of organizational ostracism on knowledge hiding: analysing the sequential mediating role of efficacy needs and psychological distress. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(2), 485–505. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-03-2021-0223 Birtch, t. a., chiang, F. F., & Van esch, e. (2016). a social exchange theory framework for understanding the job characteristics–job outcomes relationship: the mediating role of psychological contract fulfillment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(11), 1217–1236. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1069752 Bowling, n. a., & gruys, M. l. (2010). Overlooked issues in the conceptualization and measurement of counterproductive work behavior. Human Resource Management Review, 20(1), 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.03.008 Bujang, M. a., Omar, e. D., & Baharum, n. a. (2018). a review on sample size determination for cronbach’s alpha test: a simple guide for researchers. The Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences: MJMS, 25(6), 85–99. https://doi. org/10.21315/mjms2018.25.6.9 chan, s. (2021). the interplay between relational and transactional psychological contracts and burnout and engagement. Asia Pacific Management Review, 26(1), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2020.06.004 chen, R., & song, J. (2019). effect of workplace ostracism on counterproductive work behavior–-Psychological contract breach as the mediator. UTCC International Journal of Business and Economics (UTCC IJBE), 11(2), 3–23. cohen, a., & Diamant, a. (2019). the role of justice perceptions in determining counterproductive work behaviors. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(20), 2901–2924. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.20 17.1340321 coyle-shapiro, J. a.-M., Pereira costa, s., Doden, W., & chang, c. (2019). Psychological contracts: Past, present, and future. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6(1), 145–169. https://doi. org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015212 cross, c., & Dundon, t. (2019). social exchange theory, employment relations and human resource management. in Elgar introduction to theories of human resources and employment relations (pp. 264–279). edward elgar Publishing. estreder, Y., Rigotti, t., tomás, i., & Ramos, J. (2020). Psychological contract and organizational justice: the role of normative contract. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 42(1), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1108/eR-02-2018-0039 Faruk, s. (2019). the effect of psychological contract, organizational justice and organizational support on psychological contract breach: the mediating effect of trust. Ferris, D. l., Brown, D. J., Berry, J. W., & lian, h. (2008). the development and validation of the Workplace Ostracism scale. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1348–1366. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012743 gamian-Wilk, M., & Madeja-Bien, K. (2021). Ostracism in the workplace. Special Topics and Particular Occupations, Professions and Sectors, 4, 3–32. griep, Y., & Vantilborgh, t. (2018). let’s get cynical about this! Recursive relationships between psychological contract breach and counterproductive work behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 91(2), 421– 429. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12201 griep, Y., hansen, s. D., & Kraak, J. M. (2023). Perceived identity threat and organizational cynicism in the recursive relationship between psychological contract breach and counterproductive work behavior. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 44(2), 351–384. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X211070326 18 M. R. saBiR etal. griep, Y., Vantilborgh, t., & Jones, s. K. (2020). the relationship between psychological contract breach and counterproductive work behavior in social enterprises: Do paid employees and volunteers differ? Economic and Industrial Democracy, 41(3), 727–745. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X17744029 gulzar, s., ayub, n., & abbas, Z. (2021). examining the mediating-moderating role of psychological contract breach and abusive supervision on employee well-being in banking sector. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1), 1959007. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1959007 gürlek, M. (2021). Workplace ostracism, syrian migrant workers’ counterproductive work behaviors, and acculturation: evidence from turkey. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 46, 336–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jhtm.2021.01.012 hair, J. F., Jr, hult, g. t. M., Ringle, c. M., sarstedt, M., Danks, n. P., Ray, s., hair, J. F., hult, g. t. M., Ringle, c. M., & sarstedt, M. (2021). evaluation of reflective measurement models. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R: a Workbook, 3, 75–90. haldorai, K., Kim, W. g., Phetvaroon, K., & li, J. (. (2020). left out of the office “tribe”: the influence of workplace ostracism on employee work engagement. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(8), 2717–2735. https://doi.org/10.1108/iJchM-04-2020-0285 hitlan, R. t., & noel, J. (2009). the influence of workplace exclusion and personality on counterproductive work behaviours: an interactionist perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18(4), 477–502. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320903025028 howard, M. c., cogswell, J. e., & smith, M. B. (2020). the antecedents and outcomes of workplace ostracism: a meta-analysis. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(6), 577–596. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000453 imran, M. K., Fatima, t., sarwar, a., & iqbal, s. M. J. (2023). Will i speak up or remain silent? Workplace ostracism and employee performance based on self-control perspective. The Journal of Social Psychology, 163(1), 107–125. https:// doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2021.1967843 Jafri, h. (2011). influence of Psychological contract Breach on Organizational commitment. Synergy, 9(2), 311–324. Jahanzeb, s., Bouckenooghe, D., & Baig, M. U. a. (2022). Does attachment anxiety accentuate the effect of perceived contract breach on counterproductive work behaviors? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 52(9), 809–822. https:// doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12879 Kaewkungwal, J., & adams, P. (2019). ethical consideration of the research proposal and the informed-consent process: an online survey of researchers and ethics committee members in thailand. Accountability in Research, 26(3), 176–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2019.1608190 Kamis, a., saibon, R. a., Yunus, F., Rahim, M. B., herrera, l. M., & Montenegro, P. (2020). the smartPls analyzes approach in validity and reliability of graduate marketability instrument. Social Psychology of Education, 57(8), 987– 1001. Kawakami, n., thi thu tran, t., Watanabe, K., imamura, K., thanh nguyen, h., sasaki, n., Kuribayashi, K., sakuraya, a., thuy nguyen, Q., thi nguyen, n., Minh Bui, t., thi huong nguyen, g., Minas, h., & tsutsumi, a. (2020). internal consistency reliability, construct validity, and item response characteristics of the Kessler 6 scale among hospital nurses in Vietnam. PloS One, 15(5), e0233119. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233119 Kelloway, e. K., Francis, l., Prosser, M., & cameron, J. e. (2010). counterproductive work behavior as protest. Human Resource Management Review, 20(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.03.014 Khan, K., nazir, t., & shafi, K. (2021). the effects of perceived narcissistic supervision and workplace bullying on employee silence: the mediating role of psychological contracts violation. Business & Economic Review, 13(2), 87–110. https://doi.org/10.22547/BeR/13.2.4 Kim, s. M., & Jo, s. J. (2022). an examination of the effects of job insecurity on counterproductive work behavior through organizational cynicism: Moderating roles of perceived organizational support and quality of leader-member exchange. Psychological Reports, 00332941221129135, 332941221129135. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941221129135 Knapp, J. R., Diehl, M.-R., & Dougan, W. (2020). towards a social-cognitive theory of multiple psychological contracts. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(2), 200–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/135943 2X.2019.1709538 Kundi, Y. M., & Badar, K. (2021). interpersonal conflict and counterproductive work behavior: the moderating roles of emotional intelligence and gender. International Journal of Conflict Management, 32(3), 514–534. https://doi. org/10.1108/iJcMa-10-2020-0179 leitão, M., correia, R. J., teixeira, M. s., & campos, s. (2022). effects of leadership and reward systems on employees’ motivation and job satisfaction: an application to the Portuguese textile industry. Journal of Strategy and Management, 15(4), 590–610. https://doi.org/10.1108/JsMa-07-2021-0158 li, h.-Y., & Yu, g.-l. (2017). a multilevel examination of high-performance work systems and organizational citizenship behavior: a social exchange theory perspective. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(8), 5821–5835. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01032a li, s., & chen, Y. (2018). the relationship between psychological contract breach and employees’ counterproductive work behaviors: the mediating effect of organizational cynicism and work alienation. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1273. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01273 low, Y. M., sambasivan, M., & ho, J. a. (2021). impact of abusive supervision on counterproductive work behaviors of nurses. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 59(2), 250–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12234 cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 19 Ma, B., liu, s., lassleben, h., & Ma, g. (2019). the relationships between job insecurity, psychological contract breach and counterproductive workplace behavior: Does employment status matter? Personnel Review, 48(2), 595–610. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-04-2018-0138 Madden, t. M., Madden, l. t., strickling, J. a., & eddleston, K. a. (2017). Psychological contract and social exchange in family firms. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, 16(1/2), 109–127. https://doi. org/10.1504/iJMeD.2017.082543 Manninen, s. M., Koponen, s., sinervo, t., & laulainen, s. (2023). Workplace ostracism in healthcare: association with job satisfaction, stress, and perceived health. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 1, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15934 Mao, Y., liu, Y., Jiang, c., & Zhang, i. D. (2018). Why am i ostracized and how would i react?—a review of workplace ostracism research. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 35, 745–767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-017-9538-8 Mapira, n., Mitonga-Monga, J., & Ukpere, W. i. (2023). counter-productive work behaviors: the right or misguided path? Journal of Namibian Studies: History Politics Culture, 36, 1414–1431. Memon, K. R., & ghani, B. (2020). the relationship between psychological contract and voice behavior—a social exchange perspective. Asian Journal of Business Ethics, 9(2), 257–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-020-00109-4 Montes, s. D., & irving, P. g. (2008). Disentangling the effects of promised and delivered inducements: Relational and transactional contract elements and the mediating role of trust. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1367– 1381. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012851 nasir, s., nasir, n., Khan, s., Khan, W., & akyürek, s. s. (2023). exclusion or insult at the workplace: responses to ostracism through employee’s efficacy and relational needs with psychological capital. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 36. 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOcM-07-2023-0282 Paolillo, a., sinval, J., silva, s. a., & scuderi, V. e. (2021). the relationship between inclusion climate and voice behaviors beyond social exchange obligation: the role of psychological needs satisfaction. Sustainability, 13(18), 10252. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810252 Pelliccio, l. J., & Walker, s. (2022). What is an interpersonal ostracism message? Bringing the construct of ostracism into communication studies. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 30(2), 172–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870. 2020.1859509 Pletzer, J. l. (2021). Why older employees engage in less counterproductive work behavior and in more organizational citizenship behavior: examining the role of the heXacO personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 173, 110550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110550 Protsiuk, O. (2019). the relationships between psychological contract expectations and counterproductive work behaviors: employer perception. Central European Management Journal, 27(3), 85–106. https://doi.org/10.7206/ cemj.2658-0845.4 Qadir, M. s., shah, M. a. a., ali, M. Z., & imtiaz, M. h. (2021). the effect of abusive supervision and workplace ostracism on knowledge hiding behavior of the healthcare employees. Rai, a., & agarwal, U. a. (2017). linking workplace bullying and work engagement: the mediating role of psychological contract violation. South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management, 4(1), 42–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/2322093717704732 Robinson, c. l. (2019). Justice, peace, and belonging: The effect of negative emotions on distributive justice and ostracism. seattle Pacific University. sabir, M. R., Majid, D. M. B., aslam, D. M. Z., Rehman, c. a., & Rehman, P. (2024). Does workplace ostracism lead to counterproductive work behavior in healthcare employees: the role of transactional and relational psychological contract breach. Sumaira, Does Workplace Ostracism Lead to Counterproductive Work Behavior in Healthcare Employees: The Role of Transactional and Relational Psychological Contract Breach. salazar-Fierro, P., & Bayardo, J. M. (2015). influence of relational psychological contract and affective commitment in the intentions of employee to share tacit knowledge. Open Journal of Business and Management, 03(03), 300–311. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2015.33030 spector, P. e., & Fox, s. (2002). an emotion-centered model of voluntary work behavior: some parallels between counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior. Human Resource Management Review, 12(2), 269–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1053-4822(02)00049-9 stafford, l., & Kuiper, K. (2021). social exchange theories: calculating the rewards and costs of personal relationships. in Engaging theories in interpersonal communication (pp. 379–390). Routledge. takhsha, M., Barahimi, n., adelpanah, a., & salehzadeh, R. (2020). the effect of workplace ostracism on knowledge sharing: the mediating role of organization-based self-esteem and organizational silence. Journal of Workplace Learning, 32(6), 417–435. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWl-07-2019-0088 topa, g., aranda-carmena, M., & De-Maria, B. (2022). Psychological contract breach and outcomes: a systematic review of reviews. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(23), 15527. https://doi. org/10.3390/ijerph192315527 tufan, P., & Wendt, h. (2020). Organizational identification as a mediator for the effects of psychological contract breaches on organizational citizenship behavior: insights from the perspective of ethnic minority employees. European Management Journal, 38(1), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.07.001 Vitrano, D., altarriba, J., & leblebici-Basar, D. (2021). Revisiting Mednick’s (1962) theory of creativity with a composite measure of creativity: the effect of stimulus type on word association production. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(4), 925–936. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.498 20 M. R. saBiR etal. Wang, Y., li, Z., Wang, Y., & gao, F. (2017). Psychological contract and turnover intention: the mediating role of organizational commitment. Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies, 05(01), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.4236/ jhrss.2017.51003 Witten, R. (2019). Exploring the role of employee entitlement in counterproductive work behaviour. stellenbosch University. Yan, Y., Zhou, e., long, l., & Ji, Y. (2014). the influence of workplace ostracism on counterproductive work behavior: the mediating effect of state self-control. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(6), 881–890. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.6.881 Yang, J., & treadway, D. c. (2018). a social influence interpretation of workplace ostracism and counterproductive work behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(4), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2912-x Zagenczyk, t. J., gibney, R., Few, W. t., & scott, K. l. (2011). Psychological contracts and organizational identification: the mediating effect of perceived organizational support. Journal of Labor Research, 32(3), 254–281. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12122-011-9111-z Zaman, U., nawaz, s., shafique, O., & Rafique, s. (2021). Making of rebel talent through workplace ostracism: a moderated-mediation model involving emotional intelligence, organizational conflict and knowledge sharing behavior. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1), 1941586. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1941586 Zappalà, s., sbaa, M. Y., Kamneva, e. V., Zhigun, l. a., Korobanova, Z. V., & chub, a. a. (2022). current approaches, typologies and predictors of deviant work behaviors: a scoping review of reviews. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 674066. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.674066 Zhao, M., chen, Z., glambek, M., & einarsen, s. V. (2019). leadership ostracism behaviors from the target’s perspective: a content and behavioral typology model derived from interviews with chinese employees. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1197. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01197