Next Article in Journal
From Novice to Master(s) Level Athlete: A Longitudinal Analysis of Psychological Changes in a Marathon Runner Completing 119 Marathons
Previous Article in Journal
How Perceived Positive Parenting Style Protects Against Academic Procrastination in Children: The Mediating Roles of Emotional Resilience and School Emotional Engagement
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Behavioral Sciences
Volume 15
Issue 7
10.3390/bs15070892
behavsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Impact of Perceived Organizational Politics on Peer Voice Endorsement: A Dual Mediation Model

by
Peiwen Qiu
,
Tingjing Chen
,
Liao Hu
and
Hao Zhou
*
Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Behav. Sci. 2025, 15(7), 892; https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15070892
Submission received: 18 March 2025 / Revised: 9 June 2025 / Accepted: 25 June 2025 / Published: 30 June 2025
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

Peer voice endorsement, an emerging focus in voice research, is recognized for its important role in enhancing work process efficiency. This study aims to examine the impact of perceived organizational politics on peer voice endorsement. It also explores the underlying mechanisms by developing a model based on the cognitive-affective personality system theory. Study data were collected in three waves from 226 full-time employees in China. The hypotheses were examined using SPSS 25.0 and the PROCESS macro. Empirical results indicate that perceived organizational politics negatively affects both psychological safety and affective commitment. Psychological safety and affective commitment also play a facilitating role in peer voice endorsement. Moreover, these two factors serve as mediators in the relationship between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement. By highlighting the pivotal role of perceived organizational politics, this study offers valuable insights into its implications for peer voice endorsement. It further underscores the significance of psychological safety and affective commitment, demonstrating their essential function in cultivating a work environment that encourages peer voice endorsement.

1. Introduction

Employees are well-versed in their own and their department’s work and are best aware of the irrationalities in need of improvement within processes and systems. If employees can actively voice their opinions, it will not only help the organization to optimize processes and avoid losses but also stimulate innovation and change (Davidson et al., 2017; Liang et al., 2019). As research on voice progresses, researchers have found that merely encouraging employees to voice is far from sufficient (Morrison, 2014). Despite the benefits of employee constructive voice, the value of voice itself cannot be fully realized without its endorsement (Isaakyan et al., 2021; Zhang & Chen, 2024). Furthermore, W. Liu et al. (2010) proposed two types of voice behavior: speaking out, which is directed toward peers, and speaking up, which is directed toward leaders. Existing research on voice endorsement primarily focuses on speaking up, highlighting scenarios where leaders endorse voice (including those from employees and colleagues), which we refer to as managerial endorsement (Burris, 2012; Weiss & Morrison, 2019). Given that peers often serve as the primary recipients of voice, they may actively exchange ideas, share information, and express opinions regarding necessary improvements (Brykman & Raver, 2023; Detert et al., 2013). Yet, the interaction of peers is an aspect often overlooked within the context where much of the voice happens (Bain et al., 2021). Thus, different from managerial endorsement, this study examines peer voice endorsement, corresponding to speaking out.
Drawing on the cognitive-affective personality system (CAPS) theory proposed by Mischel and Shoda (1995), an individual’s affective cognition constantly interacts with the external environment in a two-way process. The behaviors stemming from an individual’s affective cognition can influence the social milieu and interpersonal dynamics, subsequently shaping the individual’s affective cognition. Peer voice endorsement occurs within the organizational context, where an individual’s perception of the organizational environment plays a pivotal role in determining how they interpret peers’ voice behavior and decide whether to endorse their voice. Organizational politics, recognized as common self-serving behaviors within the organizational environment (C. H. Chang et al., 2009; H. Chang & Pak, 2024), can influence employees’ behaviors in the workplace through their perception of organizational politics, also known as perceived organizational politics (Vigoda, 2002). In the Chinese context, the phenomenon of organizational politics is notably more prevalent (Su & Xie, 2023), which is closely related to the cultural emphasis on interpersonal relationships. Guanxi, as a prominent cultural characteristic, profoundly shapes interpersonal interactions and power dynamics within organizations (Buckley et al., 2006). Moreover, Chinese culture emphasizes collectivism, valuing team harmony and collaboration among members (Bai et al., 2016). Within such a cultural environment, employees often exhibit increased sensitivity to organizational politics, such as power struggles and perceived injustice in resource distribution. Therefore, perceived organizational politics may have a more pronounced effect on employees in China than in Western countries. In this context, exploring the link between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement presents an insightful opportunity to better understand organizational behavior across diverse cultural settings. In line with the CAPS theory, perceived organizational politics, serving as crucial social and interpersonal contextual cues, exerts an impact on peer voice endorsement. Furthermore, the CAPS theory suggests that perceived organizational politics affects peer voice endorsement by shaping individuals’ internal cognitive processes and affective states. Therefore, exploring the effect of perceived organizational politics on peer voice endorsement through both cognitive and affective lenses is essential.
Voice endorsement, while beneficial, also entails risks (Y. Cheng et al., 2020; Detert & Burris, 2007). Employees may find it challenging to gauge the efficacy of voice endorsement when they are uncertain about their peers’ motivations. Moreover, in highly politicized organizational environments, employees often perceive a threat to their status due to peers’ voice behavior and may hold negative views about the intentions behind their peers’ voice (P. Liu et al., 2022). From a cognitive perspective, when employees have a strong perception of organizational politics, they may feel uneasy about endorsing their peers’ voice. This unease could arise from a belief that their peers are involved in conspiracies, prompting them to avoid the risks of peer voice endorsement. From an affective standpoint, perceived organizational politics tends to diminish employees’ attachment to the organization. In environments characterized by heightened political behaviors, employees are less inclined to undertake risks that could potentially advance the organization’s growth. Consequently, by integrating cognitive and affective perspectives, this study examines how psychological safety and affective commitment function as mediators between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement.
We therefore pose the following three research questions: (1) Does the subjective cognitive factor of perceived organizational politics influence employees’ psychological safety and affective commitment to the organization? If so, through what mechanisms? (2) How do employees’ psychological safety and affective commitment influence peer voice endorsement? (3) Does perceived organizational politics affect peer voice endorsement? If so, is the effect direct or indirect, and what mediating mechanisms are involved?
To conclude, this research investigates how employees’ perceptions of organizational politics influence their endorsement of peers’ voice, while also uncovering the psychological mechanisms that drive this relationship. Grounded in the CAPS theory, this study expands the scope of voice endorsement beyond the conventional leader-employee framework to the domain of peer voice endorsement. This study introduces organizational politics as the situational factor to examine peer voice endorsement, thereby enriching research on perceived organizational politics. Moreover, this study enhances our understanding of employee behavior and workplace engagement by clarifying the specific mechanisms through which psychological safety and affective commitment mediate the link between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement.
The following sections are organized as follows: Section 2 provides a comprehensive review of the relevant literature and presents the research hypotheses. The data and methodology, as well as variable measurement, are presented in Section 3. In Section 4, we detail the data analysis methods and report the empirical results. Section 5 interprets the findings, discusses the theoretical contributions and practical implications, identifies study limitations, and suggests directions for future research. Section 6 concludes the study.

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses

2.1. POP, Psychological Safety, and Affective Commitment

Perceived organizational politics (POP) refers to how employees subjectively evaluate the self-serving actions of their colleagues and supervisors within the workplace, often attributing these behaviors to specific individuals (Ferris et al., 2000, 2019). Organizational politics often involves power struggles, informal norms, coalitions, and the pursuit of personal or group interests (C. Li et al., 2020). Previous research has generally viewed organizational politics negatively, believing that it adversely affects both organizational outcomes and employees’ work behaviors. For instance, Landells and Albrecht (2017) elaborated on the organizational-level impacts through qualitative research, highlighting phenomena such as unclear organizational goals, internal conflicts and tensions, and the prevalence of factions. At the individual level, perceived organizational politics is linked to emotions such as exclusion, frustration, and stress among employees. AL-Abrrow (2022) conducted a study on employees in the health sector, finding a positive association between their perceptions of organizational politics and silence. Through a survey of full-time employees at two private service enterprises in China, Zhou and Sun (2024) discovered a negative association between perceived organizational politics and employees’ positive affect. Additionally, the focus of research on perceived organizational politics has shifted from macro-level discussions to examining individual behaviors (Hochwarter et al., 2020). According to the CAPS theory, internal cognitive and affective processes can be triggered by external situational factors, ultimately influencing individuals’ behaviors (Mischel & Shoda, 1995). Given the focus of this study on exploring peer voice endorsement, we direct our attention toward psychological safety as the cognitive factor and affective commitment as the affective factor.
Psychological safety refers to the perception that individuals can fully express their authentic selves without concern for potential harm to their reputation, status, or professional growth (Kahn, 1990). It also refers to a workplace condition that provides employees with sufficient certainty and predictability, allowing them to feel secure and trusted within the organization (Gip et al., 2025; Tu et al., 2019). However, the existence of organizational politics often leads to a high level of uncertainty, which conflicts with psychological safety. De Clercq et al. (2018) found in a study of ten organizations from various industries in Pakistan that organizational politics has a positive impact on employees’ perceptions of unfairness. Moreover, insufficient organizational fairness is one of the key reasons for employees’ lack of psychological safety (Chinomona & Chinomona, 2013). Specifically, in environments with high perceived organizational politics, limited organizational resources often lead internal individuals or interest groups to adopt informal means to maintain existing benefits or seek additional resources, resulting in unfairness and uncertainty in the organizational atmosphere (S. Wang et al., 2025). In such unpredictable situations, employees experience a general sense of unease, which in turn weakens their psychological safety (C. Li et al., 2020). Furthermore, when employees lack trust in their peers, they are more likely to interpret their peers’ actions as self-serving, intensifying tension. The uncertainty in interpersonal relationships and the work environment further diminishes employees’ psychological safety.
Affective commitment, widely regarded as the core dimension for measuring organizational commitment (Demircioglu, 2023; Im et al., 2016), reflects employees’ organizational identity, emotional attachment, loyalty, and involvement (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Existing studies have proved that individual characteristics (e.g., demographic traits and personal dispositions), organizational structure (e.g., decision-making decentralization, policy, and procedure formalization), and work experiences (e.g., organizational rewards, fairness in procedures, and support from supervisors) significantly impact employees’ affective commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). In a study of two private service enterprises in China, Zhou and Sun (2024) found that one of the key factors leading to the reduction of positive emotions is perceived organizational politics. When employees perceive high levels of organizational politics, it can signal several underlying issues: (a) it may indicate that the organization frequently employs power and resources for personal gain, leading to diminished trust among employees, heightened scrutiny of one another, reduced interpersonal interaction, and decreased collegial cohesion; (b) the organization might encounter ambiguity and uncertainty, hindering employees’ ability to grasp its goals and the methods to accomplish them; (c) it may suggest that organizational members engage in competition for limited resources for their individual benefit, thereby compromising organizational fairness and diminishing emotional attachment and commitment among employees. Perceived organizational politics is associated with employee burnout (Vigoda-Gadot & Talmud, 2010) and turnover intentions (C. H. Chang et al., 2009), both of which can serve as factors that undermine the emotional bond between employees and the organization.
To sum up, perceived organizational politics represents a hindrance stressor (C. H. Chang et al., 2009), and is detrimental to maintaining healthy employee-organization relationships. A politicized environment may jeopardize employees’ psychological safety and have a negative impact on their emotional bond with the organization. Consequently, Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 are proposed.
Hypothesis 1:
Perceived organizational politics has a negative impact on employees’ psychological safety.
Hypothesis 2:
Perceived organizational politics has a negative impact on employees’ affective commitment.

2.2. Psychological Safety, Affective Commitment, and Peer Voice Endorsement

In the existing literature, there is limited analysis of peer voice endorsement within organizations, with more focus on managerial endorsement (Lam et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2021). Previous research has shown that leaders may not always welcome the voice of subordinates and may reject it or even penalize employees with low-performance evaluations (Morrison, 2014). Additionally, researchers have begun to explore the risk factors influencing managerial endorsement (Burris, 2012; Detert & Burris, 2007). The risks of voice endorsement include: (a) the intention of the voicer is not clear, which may be a kind of criticism, threat, or even provocation, and voice endorsement may be seen as giving in and showing weakness to some extent; (b) voice endorsement often implies a desire to challenge the status quo, which can be risky and lead to negative outcomes such as disruption of workflow, increased costs, and decreased efficiency. Similarly, these risks are also applicable when it comes to peer voice endorsement. Compared to leaders, there is a lack of formal power relationship coordination mechanisms among employees, making peer voice endorsement more susceptible to factors such as emotions, relationships, and trust. Therefore, how to promote peer voice endorsement by enhancing employees’ psychological safety and affective commitment becomes an issue worth exploring.
Psychological safety empowers employees to engage in behaviors that might entail interpersonal risks, such as participating in open communication, voicing opinions and concerns, and actively seeking feedback (Pearsall & Ellis, 2011). In recent years, Mehmood et al. (2021) conducted a study using teams from the manufacturing sector in Pakistan and found that psychological safety is positively related to team creativity. Harvey et al. (2019) researched the sales teams of a large financial services firm in Canada and demonstrated that psychological safety positively influences team learning. Sherf et al. (2021) found, through a meta-analysis, that the psychological safety-silence relationship is stronger than the psychological safety-voice relationship. The voice behavior within the outcome variable of psychological safety has been extensively discussed at both the individual and team levels. Psychological safety plays a crucial role in enabling employees to express constructive ideas, offer improvement suggestions, and expose potential issues within the organization (Morrison, 2014; Mowbray et al., 2024). Individuals with a heightened sense of psychological safety perceive their peers as supportive of expressing their authentic selves and sharing ideas. This fosters an atmosphere of mutual respect, care, and positive affective cognition among peers. Employees collaborate effectively to resolve constructive conflicts and feel confident in taking personal risks (A. Edmondson, 1999). Consequently, they exhibit greater confidence in the ideas and suggestions put forth by their peers, viewing their voice behavior as aimed at enhancing work and avoiding errors. Additionally, employees with a strong sense of psychological safety are less apprehensive about the negative repercussions of work-related mistakes (A. C. Edmondson & Lei, 2014). Peer voice endorsement often involves challenging the status quo, which can lead to uncertain outcomes. However, those who possess a strong sense of psychological safety are more inclined to focus on problem-solving and improving work processes, rather than prioritizing self-protection (A. C. Edmondson, 2004). Therefore, employees who possess a heightened sense of psychological safety are more prone to respond positively to peers’ voice. They are inclined to evaluate the content thoughtfully, viewing it as an opportunity to enhance their work instead of perceiving it as a threat or additional burden.
Affective commitment reflects employees’ organizational identity, emotional attachment, loyalty, and involvement (Meyer & Allen, 1991). In existing research, affective commitment is associated with positive work behaviors. In a study involving employees from various industries, Shao et al. (2022) discovered that affective commitment positively influences job performance. Kim and Beehr (2020) conducted research on full-time employees in the United States and discovered that affective commitment contributes to a decrease in the occurrence of withdrawal behaviors. Employees with high levels of commitment to their organization typically accept the organization’s goals and values and pursue providing quality service on behalf of the organization (Bai et al., 2023; Shao et al., 2022). Moreover, when the organization effectively meets the needs of employees, their affective commitment toward the organization strengthens, fostering a deeper sense of identity and loyalty (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Caliskan et al. (2024) identified affective commitment as a key driver of voice behavior, suggesting that it not only deepens employees’ emotional attachment to the organization but also has a reinforcing effect on their likelihood to engage in voice behavior. Specifically, employees with strong affective commitment are more willing to share information within the organization (Tucker & Turner, 2015), prompting them to identify potential problems and improve work processes. They are also more inclined to endorse constructive voice from peers, thereby better achieving organizational goals. Therefore, we propose the following hypotheses.
Hypothesis 3:
Employees’ psychological safety has a positive impact on peer voice endorsement.
Hypothesis 4:
Employees’ affective commitment has a positive impact on peer voice endorsement.

2.3. The Mediating Role of Psychological Safety and Affective Commitment

According to the CAPS theory, situational factors have the potential to activate an individual’s cognitive-affective unit, and the interaction between a situation and a cognitive-affective unit will further affect employees’ behavioral response to the situation (Mischel & Shoda, 1995). Perceived organizational politics is the subjective perception of political behavior in the organization, which also reflects the situational factor of organizational politics (Ferris et al., 2000). Psychological safety is a subjective feeling, referring to employees’ sense of environmental certainty and predictability within the organization, which enables them to freely express their opinions, take risks, and actively demonstrate initiative and creativity (Tu et al., 2019; Zhan et al., 2025). However, when there is a strong political atmosphere within the organization, employees face increased uncertainty and situational ambiguity, which in turn weakens their trust and sense of safety in the organizational environment (A. Edmondson, 1999). In such a context, individuals’ cognitive-affective units may be activated into a defensive psychological state, leading employees to exhibit heightened vigilance and avoidance tendencies when responding to peers’ voice (Saei & Liu, 2024). Specifically, if employees lack psychological safety, they may respond to peer voice with suspicion. On the one hand, they might suspect that personal motives lie behind the voice (Zhao et al., 2024). On the other hand, they may fear that endorsing such voice could threaten their own interests or organizational status. As a result, employees may be unwilling to genuinely endorse peers’ voice and fail to see the voice as an opportunity for problem-solving or self-improvement, thus suppressing the occurrence of constructive interactions within the organization.
The organization’s political behavior, characterized by breaches of operational rules, fosters uncertainty and distrust among employees (Kacmar & Carlson, 1997). The interpersonal relationships among peers will be negatively influenced, resulting in a decline in fair and just treatment. A study by Brammer et al. (2007) on employees of a large retail banking services company in the United Kingdom revealed a positive relationship between procedural fairness and organizational commitment. When employees perceive strong procedural fairness in their organization, they become more involved in their work and develop stronger affective commitment (Stan & Vîrgă, 2021). Affective commitment is gradually formed through employees’ work experiences in interactions with leaders, work teams, and others (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Consequently, organizational politics, as a situational factor, triggers responses within employees’ affective units. The interaction between organizational politics and affective units impacts employees’ organizational behavior. Low levels of affective commitment diminish employees’ sense of identity and involvement, resulting in reduced motivation to pursue organizational objectives. Therefore, when facing the voice behavior of peers, employees will not easily endorse their voice for the sake of the organization. Moreover, supporting peers’ voice will deplete employees’ resources, both tangible (e.g., time and attention) and intangible (e.g., emotional energy and personal resources) (Zhang & Chen, 2024). When employees perceive political behavior within the organization, their affective commitment tends to decrease, as they feel that their position and contributions within the organization are overlooked or undervalued. In such situations, employees are typically reluctant to increase their work input to make greater contributions to achieving organizational goals (Malik et al., 2024). They may believe that even if they work hard, they will not receive the recognition and rewards they deserve.
In summary, high levels of perceived organizational politics reflect a pervasive political climate within an organization. As shown in Figure 1, this heightened political atmosphere activates employees’ cognitive units regarding psychological safety and also impacts affective units, specifically their affective commitment to the organization. By influencing the cognitive-affective unit, it ultimately impacts employees’ evaluation of peer voice endorsement. Therefore, Hypothesis 5 and Hypothesis 6 are proposed.
Hypothesis 5:
Psychological safety mediates the relationship between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement.
Hypothesis 6:
Affective commitment mediates the relationship between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement.

3. Method

3.1. Sample and Procedure

The data were collected through the administration of a questionnaire survey. During the study period, participants were registered as on-the-job Master of Business Administration (MBA) students at a university in Western China. They were full-time employees from various industries and companies, with diverse professional backgrounds and work experiences. To mitigate common method bias, the study employed a questionnaire survey conducted offline three times with a two-week interval between each administration. At Time 1, the independent variable and control variables—including demographic variables and Zhongyong—were measured. The mediating variables—psychological safety and affective commitment—were measured at Time 2, while the dependent variable—peer voice endorsement—was evaluated at Time 3. Each time participants completed the questionnaire, they provided their cell phone number. These numbers served as identifiers to match the three questionnaires. Additionally, participants received a 10 CNY phone credit reward for each completed questionnaire. Those who completed all three questionnaires received an additional 10 CNY in phone credit as an incentive.
Initially, 409 questionnaires were distributed. Following data matching and the elimination of invalid responses, 226 valid questionnaires were collected, yielding a response rate of 55.3%. Table 1 presents the basic characteristics of the participants. Among the participants, 120 were male (53.1%) and 106 were female (46.9%). The average age of participants was 32.2 years, and their average organizational tenure was 6.02 years.

3.2. Measures

All measures were translated into Chinese following the procedure of translation and back-translation (Brislin, 1980). Participants responded using a 5-point Likert scale, except for the demographic variables.
Perceived organizational politics. The scale developed by Vigoda (2001) consists of six items. A sample item is “People in this organization attempt to build themselves up by tearing others down”. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha was 0.89.
Psychological safety. This scale, which comprises seven items, was originally developed by A. Edmondson (1999). A sample item is “No one in this organization would deliberately act in a way that undermines my efforts”. The Cronbach’s alpha for this scale in the current study was 0.80.
Affective commitment. We assessed affective commitment using a five-item scale from Gao-Urhahn et al. (2016). A sample item is “I am glad to have joined this organization”. The Cronbach’s alpha for this scale was 0.94.
Peer voice endorsement. Peer voice endorsement was measured by a five-item scale adapted from Burris (2012). One of the sample items is “I will implement the comments and suggestions from my colleagues”. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha of the scale was 0.85.
Control variables. This study controlled for employees’ gender, age, organizational tenure, and Zhongyong. Since the research sample is from China, cultural factors may influence the study results. The concept of Zhongyong, in the context of Chinese culture, is expressed through individuals’ tendency to adopt the principle of ‘harmony in diversity’ when engaging in interpersonal relationships. This means adopting a neutral and balanced approach when facing differing opinions or interacting with people of diverse personalities (He & Li, 2021). Zhongyong thinking is associated with voice behavior (Duan & Ling, 2011). Therefore, to mitigate the impact of Zhongyong on the research findings and enhance the generalizability, Zhongyong is also included as part of the control variables. The six-item scale developed by Du et al. (2014) was employed to measure Zhongyong, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.80.

4. Results

4.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Common Method Bias Testing

Confirmatory factor analysis was employed in this study. As shown in Table 2, the hypothesized five-factor model exhibited a satisfactory fit with the data (χ2/df = 1.73, RMSEA = 0.06, CFI = 0.91, IFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.90), while alternative models demonstrated poor fit. This finding confirmed the distinctiveness of the five measures. Although we collected data at three different time points, the data all originated from self-reports by employees, which still posed a potential risk of common method bias. Therefore, Harman’s single-factor test was conducted, and the results showed that the variance explained by the principal factor was 28.76%, which did not exceed 40% (Podsakoff et al., 2003). This suggested that common method bias was not a serious concern.

4.2. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis

Table 3 presents the mean values, standard deviations, and correlation coefficients for all variables. Data analysis results indicated a significant negative correlation between perceived organizational politics and psychological safety (r = −0.32, p < 0.01), as well as between perceived organizational politics and affective commitment (r = −0.56, p < 0.01). A significant positive correlation was observed between psychological safety and peer voice endorsement (r = 0.30, p < 0.01). Additionally, affective commitment was positively correlated with peer voice endorsement (r = 0.35, p < 0.01). These results serve as preliminary support for the testing of the following hypotheses.

4.3. Hypothesis Testing

In this study, SPSS version 25.0 was utilized to test the hypotheses. As shown in Table 4, perceived organizational politics exhibited a significant negative impact on psychological safety (β = −0.32, p < 0.001), thus supporting Hypothesis 1. Similarly, perceived organizational politics significantly negatively impacted affective commitment (β = −0.55, p < 0.001), confirming Hypothesis 2. Psychological safety demonstrated a significant positive effect on peer voice endorsement (β = 0.16, p < 0.05), which validated Hypothesis 3. Furthermore, affective commitment had a significant positive impact on peer voice endorsement (β = 0.30, p < 0.001), thereby supporting Hypothesis 4.
To further verify Hypothesis 5 and Hypothesis 6, this study employed the PROCESS macro proposed by Hayes (2013). The sample size was determined to be 5000, with a confidence interval of 95%. As shown in Table 5, the mediating effect of psychological safety between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement was found to be significant (indirect effect = −0.06, 95% CI = [−0.10, −0.03], excluding 0). Therefore, Hypothesis 5 was supported. Additionally, the mediating effect of affective commitment between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement was significant (indirect effect = −0.13, 95% CI = [−0.19, −0.08], excluding 0). Consequently, Hypothesis 6 was supported. The data analysis presented above supported all the hypotheses proposed in this study, offering robust empirical evidence for the suggested relationships. A summary of the hypothesis testing results can be found in Table 6.

5. Discussion

This study uses CAPS theory to investigate whether and how perceived organizational politics influences peer voice endorsement. Unlike the existing studies, which mainly focused on voice endorsement between leader and subordinate, this study pays attention to voice endorsement between peers.
The results highlight a detrimental impact of perceived organizational politics on psychological safety, aligning with the findings of J. Li et al. (2014), who found the same negative relationship in Chinese electronic companies. However, this study extends voice behavior to peer voice endorsement, thereby providing additional insights and enriching the existing literature. We also find that perceived organizational politics negatively affects affective commitment. Previous studies have verified the negative relationship between the two (Kimura, 2013; Vigoda-Gadot & Talmud, 2010). This study further confirms this perspective. Moreover, we propose that psychological safety promotes peer voice endorsement. In previous studies, Sherf et al. (2021) suggested that psychological safety predicts silence but does not predict voice behavior. Xu et al. (2019) found that psychological safety is positively correlated with subordinates’ voice. Building on prior research, this study further extends the field by highlighting the positive effect of psychological safety on peer voice endorsement. Affective commitment has also been shown to exert a positive influence on peer voice endorsement, consistent with previous findings. For example, Tucker and Turner (2015) reported that employees who possess ideas on improving occupational safety and demonstrate strong affective commitment are more likely to proactively propose improvements and voice their opinions. J. Cheng et al. (2022) also demonstrated the positive relationship between affective commitment and employees’ voice behavior through a survey of employees from 15 retailing companies located along the southeastern coast of China. This research provides additional evidence supporting the positive impact of affective commitment on peer voice endorsement. The results reveal that perceived organizational politics inhibits peer voice endorsement by influencing psychological safety and affective commitment separately. According to J. Li et al. (2014), psychological safety functions as a key mediator connecting perceived organizational politics with voice behavior. C. Liu et al. (2025) proposed that the relationship between technical anonymity and employees’ willingness to speak up was partially mediated by psychological safety. Additionally, Landells and Albrecht (2019) suggested that further research could examine how psychological safety functions as either a mediator or moderator in the relationship between perceived organizational politics and a variety of outcome variables. Therefore, this study enriches previous scholars’ research and responds to their call. Moreover, affective commitment serves as a mediator in the relationship between leadership style and voice behavior (J. Cheng et al., 2022). Morrison (2023) also highlighted in the review that affective commitment is a key mediating variable in the relationship between leadership and voice behavior. Building on this, the present study extends the role of affective commitment by proposing that it not only serves as a mediating variable in the relationship between different leadership styles and voice behavior, but also acts as a crucial intermediary between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement. The findings increase our understanding of the pathways through which perceived organizational politics impacts peer voice endorsement and provide new insights into how to promote peer voice endorsement.

5.1. Theoretical Contributions

First, this study extends the scope of voice endorsement research. Existing research on voice endorsement has primarily examined how leaders respond to employees’ voice, with particular emphasis on the role of leadership styles on managerial endorsement (Ng et al., 2021; Shu et al., 2022). As enterprises modernize and organizational structures flatten, they promote horizontal information flow among colleagues and enhance interpersonal communication (Manz, 1986). Also, the dispersion of knowledge and resources across the organization leads to a pivotal role in exchange relationships among increasingly interdependent colleagues (Argote, 2024; Burt, 2005). Furthermore, existing research on peer voice endorsement primarily focuses on the behavioral reactions of peers as bystanders after observing an employee’s voice being endorsed by the leader (Huai et al., 2024; Ni et al., 2024; Poulton et al., 2024; Rubenstein et al., 2025). Building on the above, this study shifts focus from leader-subordinate to peer voice endorsement, providing a theoretical framework for enhancing voice endorsement.
Second, this study introduces perceived organizational politics as a cognitive contextual factor in the examination of peer voice endorsement, enriching the existing literature on perceived organizational politics. Earlier research has largely emphasized the adverse effects of perceived organizational politics on voice behavior (Bergeron & Thompson, 2020; C. Li et al., 2020). However, these studies often overlook the fact that voice behavior can be directed toward different targets, each with distinct motivational bases and behavioral implications (Zhou & Sun, 2025). Such an oversight may lead to a limited perspective. Given that the target of voice can influence both the intent and response to voice behavior, it is theoretically valuable to explore how perceived organizational politics affects employees’ willingness to endorse their peers’ voice. By incorporating peer voice endorsement into the study of perceived organizational politics, this research extends current work on perceived organizational politics and voice in a novel direction. Moreover, voice endorsement is a form of social persuasion where the persuader aims to influence the persuadee through compelling information (Liang et al., 2024; Whiting et al., 2012). Classic persuasion models highlight key factors, such as the persuader, the persuadee, the message, and the context (Y. Wang et al., 2021). Past research has focused on the characteristics of the voice sender, the message, and its delivery (Bonaccio & Dalal, 2006; Howell et al., 2015; Milliken et al., 2003), but has neglected the role of the organizational context, in particular the impact of political perceptions. By incorporating perceived organizational politics into the study, this research shows how a politically charged environment affects individuals’ willingness to endorse peers’ voice, enhancing our understanding of voice endorsement mechanisms in organizations.
Third, this study examines psychological safety and affective commitment as two mediating variables to explore the mechanisms through which perceived organizational politics influences peer voice endorsement, from both cognitive and affective perspectives. The findings provide preliminary evidence that psychological safety and affective commitment represent two potential pathways between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement. While previous research on the effects of perceived organizational politics on employee behavioral outcomes has mainly drawn on theories such as social exchange theory (N. A. Khan et al., 2019) and conservation of resources theory (Zhou & Sun, 2025), this study adopts a different theoretical perspective by employing the CAPS theory to examine the mediating mechanisms. In line with CAPS theory, cognitive-affective units are activated by situational factors, and the interaction between these units shapes employees’ behavioral choices. When an organization is politically charged, employees are often exposed to uncertainty, ambiguous conditions, and a lack of clarity in rules and processes, which can make them feel insecure (C. H. Chang et al., 2009; Y. N. Cheng et al., 2024). In such environments, employees may adopt self-protective behaviors or form cliques due to power struggles and perceived injustice. Some might even retaliate against peers they see as contributing to the political climate (A. Khan & Chaudhary, 2022; Meisler et al., 2019), which weakens their affective commitment to the organization. As a result, organizational politics can reduce employees’ willingness to endorse constructive voice aimed at improving the organization. This study proposes a parallel mediation model, extending CAPS theory and offering new insights into the link between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement.

5.2. Practical Implications

The present study provides valuable practical insights, in addition to theoretical contributions. The results suggest that employees’ psychological safety and affective commitment are weakened in a politically charged organizational environment, further hindering peer voice endorsement. Organizational politics, as perceived by employees, is a detrimental aspect of the work environment. It is often associated with negative job attitudes, diminished motivation, and increased work disengagement (Hochwarter et al., 2020). Therefore, to create a positive organizational atmosphere and enhance employees’ job satisfaction and motivation, organizations, leaders, and employees must work together and take effective measures to reduce the negative impact of political behaviors, thereby promoting the establishment of a more open and healthy communication and collaboration environment.

5.2.1. Practical Implications for Organizations

Organizations must recognize the negative aspects of organizational politics, as ambiguity and high uncertainty in organizational contexts can create space conducive to political behaviors. Therefore, organizations should reduce such uncertainty by standardizing processes and improving rules and regulations, providing clear guidance for employees to follow in their work (H. Chang & Pak, 2024). Additionally, organizations should focus on enhancing employees’ psychological safety and affective commitment levels, as these are key factors influencing peer voice endorsement. To achieve this, organizations can foster a supportive culture centered on trust, open communication, and meaningful work. Moreover, they can enhance employee engagement through team-building activities to foster stronger connections between employees and the organization (A. Khan & Chaudhary, 2022). Through these measures, organizations can not only enhance employee engagement but also create a healthier and more positive work environment, ultimately improving organizational effectiveness and employees’ long-term development.

5.2.2. Practical Implications for Leaders

For leaders, they should lead by example and establish appropriate behaviors through their role as a model. On the one hand, leaders should reduce ambiguity in the workplace by increasing communication with employees, ensuring that employees receive necessary information in a timely manner, and clearly communicating expected behavioral standards. In doing so, leaders can not only minimize the impact of organizational politics but also help employees align with organizational goals (Kaur & Kang, 2022). On the other hand, leaders can eliminate unreasonable or unwritten rules that might lead to unnecessary conflicts, punish harmful political activities, and reduce employees’ motivation to engage in organizational politics (C. Li et al., 2020). Additionally, leaders should provide necessary support for employees’ work, trust them, and reduce their sense of insecurity. Leaders should appropriately empower employees, enhance their sense of participation and trust, and increase their affective commitment to the organization, thereby creating favorable conditions for peer voice endorsement.

5.2.3. Practical Implications for Employees

Employees should recognize that experiencing organizational politics is inevitable (Malik et al., 2024). Therefore, they should adopt a positive attitude toward organizational politics and be prepared to respond effectively. Organizational politics is not always negative (Ferris et al., 2019; Zhou & Sun, 2024). It can also provide opportunities for growth and development. The key lies in how employees identify, interpret, and respond to these political behaviors. In an environment influenced by organizational politics, employees should cultivate the ability to effectively recognize, assess, and leverage opportunities, thereby enhancing their social sensitivity and interpersonal skills (McAllister et al., 2018). Additionally, employees should acknowledge the importance of peer voice endorsement. As the partners they interact with most frequently in daily work, peers have a clearer insight into an individual’s work status and progress, and are better positioned to identify problems and areas for improvement in the work process. By endorsing peers’ voice, employees can not only detect and resolve issues more quickly but also continuously improve their work methods, leading to enhanced work efficiency and performance.

5.3. Limitations and Directions for Future Research

First, the study is constrained by sample limitations. As the sample comprises only full-time employees from Western China, the applicability of the conclusions may be limited in other cultural contexts. Future research could consider expanding the sample to groups from different cultural backgrounds and conducting cross-cultural comparisons to verify the impact of cultural factors on the research findings. Second, the measurement of variables in this study relies on employee self-reporting. Despite efforts to minimize common method bias by collecting data at three distinct time points and conducting data analysis, the issue cannot be entirely ruled out. Moreover, the questionnaire survey used in this study cannot adequately explain the causal relationships between variables. Future studies could collect data from a variety of sources (e.g., supervisor evaluations or organizational records) to mitigate the bias and employ more research methods, such as experimental studies, to verify causality. Finally, this study may involve unassessed confounding variables at both the individual (e.g., personality traits) and group (e.g., power distance and group climate) levels, which could potentially influence the relationships between the key variables in our study. Therefore, the inclusion of these variables should be considered in future research.

6. Conclusions

Overall, this study explores the relationship between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement from the cognitive and affective perspectives, providing valuable insights into how organizational factors influence peer voice endorsement. The results indicate that perceived organizational politics notably undermines employees’ psychological safety and affective commitment. Furthermore, both psychological safety and affective commitment are crucial factors in fostering peer voice endorsement. Further analysis reveals that psychological safety and affective commitment mediate the relationship between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement, uncovering a new influencing pathway that has not been sufficiently explored in previous research. Additionally, these findings emphasize the crucial role of both cognitive and affective factors in promoting peer voice endorsement. By recognizing and effectively addressing these factors, organizations and leaders can create an environment that mitigates the negative impact of organizational politics, thus encouraging employees to participate more in and endorse constructive voice. In summary, this study deepens our understanding of how organizational politics affects employees’ voice behaviors and provides valuable theoretical and practical guidance for organizations and leaders who aim to motivate employees to express opinions and endorse voice, while fostering a positive work environment.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.Q., T.C. and H.Z.; methodology, P.Q., T.C. and L.H.; software, T.C.; validation, L.H. and H.Z.; formal analysis, P.Q. and T.C.; investigation, P.Q., T.C., L.H. and H.Z.; resources, H.Z.; data curation, P.Q. and T.C.; writing—original draft preparation, P.Q. and L.H.; writing—review and editing, P.Q. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical review and approval were waived for this study according to Article 32 of the Interpretation of the Ethical Review Measures for Life Sciences and Medical Research Involving Human Beings of China.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data from this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. AL-Abrrow, H. A. (2022). The effect of perceived organisational politics on organisational silence through organisational cynicism: Moderator role of perceived support. Journal of Management & Organization, 28(4), 754–773. [Google Scholar]
  2. Argote, L. (2024). Knowledge transfer within organizations: Mechanisms, motivation, and consideration. Annual Review of Psychology, 75(1), 405–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Bai, M., Zheng, X., Huang, X., Jing, T., Yu, C., Li, S., & Zhang, Z. (2023). How serving helps leading: Mediators between servant leadership and affective commitment. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1170490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Bai, Y., Han, G. H., & Harms, P. D. (2016). Team conflict mediates the effects of organizational politics on employee performance: A cross-level analysis in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(1), 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bain, K., Kreps, T. A., Meikle, N. L., & Tenney, E. R. (2021). Amplifying voice in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 64(4), 1288–1312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bergeron, D. M., & Thompson, P. S. (2020). Speaking up at work: The role of perceived organizational support in explaining the relationship between perceptions of organizational politics and voice behavior. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56(2), 195–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bonaccio, S., & Dalal, R. S. (2006). Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101(2), 127–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. (2007). The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(10), 1701–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oraland written materials. Allyn and Bacon. [Google Scholar]
  10. Brykman, K. M., & Raver, J. L. (2023). Persuading managers to enact ideas in organizations: The role of voice message quality, peer endorsement, and peer opposition. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 44(5), 802–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Buckley, P. J., Clegg, J., & Tan, H. (2006). Cultural awareness in knowledge transfer to China—The role of guanxi and mianzi. Journal of World Business, 41(3), 275–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Burris, E. R. (2012). The risks and rewards of speaking up: Managerial responses to employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 851–875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Burt, R. S. (2005). Brokerage and closure: An introduction to social capital. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  14. Caliskan, S., Unler, E., & Tatoglu, E. (2024). Commitment profiles for employee voice: Dual target and dominant commitment mindsets. Current Psychology, 43(2), 1696–1714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Chang, C. H., Rosen, C. C., & Levy, P. E. (2009). The relationship between perceptions of organizational politics and employee attitudes, strain, and behavior: A meta-analytic examination. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 779–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Chang, H., & Pak, J. (2024). When HRM meets politics: Interactive effects of high-performance work systems, organizational politics, and political skill on job performance. Human Resource Management Journal, 34(4), 1112–1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Cheng, J., Sun, X., Lu, J., & He, Y. (2022). How ethical leadership prompts employees’ voice behavior? The roles of employees’ affective commitment and moral disengagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 732463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Cheng, Y., Nudelman, G., Otto, K., & Ma, J. (2020). Belief in a just world and employee voice behavior: The mediating roles of perceived efficacy and risk. The Journal of Psychology, 154(2), 129–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Cheng, Y. N., Hu, C., Wang, S., & Huang, J. C. (2024). Political context matters: A joint effect of coercive power and perceived organizational politics on abusive supervision and silence. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 41(1), 81–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Chinomona, R., & Chinomona, E. (2013). The influence of employees’ perceptions of organizational politics on turnover intentions in Zimbabwe’s SME sector. South African Journal of Business Management, 44(2), 57–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Davidson, T., Van Dyne, L., & Lin, B. (2017). Too attached to speak up? It depends: How supervisor–subordinate guanxi and perceived job control influence upward constructive voice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 143, 39–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. De Clercq, D., Haq, I. U., & Azeem, M. U. (2018). The roles of informational unfairness and political climate in the relationship between dispositional envy and job performance in Pakistani organizations. Journal of Business Research, 82, 117–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Demircioglu, M. A. (2023). The effects of innovation climate on employee job satisfaction and affective commitment: Findings from public organizations. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 43(1), 130–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open? Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Detert, J. R., Burris, E. R., Harrison, D. A., & Martin, S. R. (2013). Voice flows to and around leaders: Understanding when units are helped or hurt by employee voice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(4), 624–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Du, J., Ran, M., & Cao, P. (2014). Context-contingent effect of Zhongyong on employee innovation behavior. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 46(1), 113–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Duan, J. Y., & Ling, B. (2011). A Chinese indigenous study of the construct of employee voice behavior and the influence of Zhongyong on it. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 43(10), 1185–1197. [Google Scholar]
  28. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Edmondson, A. C. (2004). Psychological safety, trust, and learning in organizations: A group-level lens. In R. M. Kramer, & K. S. Cook (Eds.), Trust and distrust in organizations: Dilemmas and approaches (pp. 239–272). Russell Sage Foundation. [Google Scholar]
  30. Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014). Psychological safety: The history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 23–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ferris, G. R., Ellen, B. P., McAllister, C. P., & Maher, L. P. (2019). Reorganizing organizational politics research: A review of the literature and identification of future research directions. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6(1), 299–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ferris, G. R., Harrell-Cook, G., & Dulebohn, J. H. (2000). Organizational politics: The nature of the relationship between politics perceptions and political behavior. In Research in the sociology of organizations (pp. 89–130). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. [Google Scholar]
  33. Gao-Urhahn, X., Biemann, T., & Jaros, S. J. (2016). How affective commitment to the organization changes over time: A longitudinal analysis of the reciprocal relationships between affective organizational commitment and income. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(4), 515–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Gip, H., Russen, M., & Guchait, P. (2025). Climate perceptions for underrepresented leaders: Influencing service employees’ proactive behaviors through psychological safety and knowledge sharing. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 129, 104204. [Google Scholar]
  35. Harvey, J. F., Johnson, K. J., Roloff, K. S., & Edmondson, A. C. (2019). From orientation to behavior: The interplay between learning orientation, open-mindedness, and psychological safety in team learning. Human Relations, 72(11), 1726–1751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  37. He, Y., & Li, T. (2021). Mediating model of college students’ Chinese Zhongyong culture thinking mode and depressive symptoms. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 14, 1555–1566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Hochwarter, W. A., Rosen, C. C., Jordan, S. L., Ferris, G. R., Ejaz, A., & Maher, L. P. (2020). Perceptions of organizational politics research: Past, present, and future. Journal of Management, 46(6), 879–907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Howell, T. M., Harrison, D. A., Burris, E. R., & Detert, J. R. (2015). Who gets credit for input? Demographic and structural status cues in voice recognition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(6), 1765–1784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Huai, M., Wen, X., Liu, Z., Wang, X., Li, W. D., & Wang, M. (2024). Does voice endorsement by supervisors enhance or constrain voicer’s personal initiative? Countervailing effects via feeling pride and feeling envied. Journal of Applied Psychology, 109(9), 1408–1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Im, T., Campbell, J. W., & Jeong, J. (2016). Commitment intensity in public organizations: Performance, innovation, leadership, and PSM. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 36(3), 219–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Isaakyan, S., Sherf, E. N., Tangirala, S., & Guenter, H. (2021). Keeping it between us: Managerial endorsement of public versus private voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(7), 1049–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Kacmar, K. M., & Carlson, D. S. (1997). Further validation of the perceptions of politics scale (POPS): A multiple sample investigation. Journal of Management, 23(5), 627–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kaur, N., & Kang, L. S. (2022). Perception of organizational politics, knowledge hiding and organizational citizenship behavior: The moderating effect of political skill. Personnel Review, 52(3), 649–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Khan, A., & Chaudhary, R. (2022). Perceived organizational politics and workplace gossip: The moderating role of compassion. International Journal of Conflict Management, 34(2), 392–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Khan, N. A., Khan, A. N., & Gul, S. (2019). Relationship between perception of organizational politics and organizational citizenship behavior: Testing a moderated mediation model. Asian Business & Management, 18(2), 122–141. [Google Scholar]
  48. Kim, M., & Beehr, T. A. (2020). Empowering leadership: Leading people to be present through affective organizational commitment? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(16), 2017–2044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Kimura, T. (2013). The moderating effects of political skill and leader–member exchange on the relationship between organizational politics and affective commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(3), 587–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Lam, C. F., Lee, C., & Sui, Y. (2019). Say it as it is: Consequences of voice directness, voice politeness, and voicer credibility on voice endorsement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(5), 642–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Landells, E. M., & Albrecht, S. L. (2017). The positives and negatives of organizational politics: A qualitative study. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(1), 41–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Landells, E. M., & Albrecht, S. L. (2019). Perceived organizational politics, engagement, and stress: The mediating influence of meaningful work. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Li, C., Liang, J., & Farh, J. L. (2020). Speaking up when water is murky: An uncertainty-based model linking perceived organizational politics to employee voice. Journal of Management, 46(3), 443–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Li, J., Wu, L. Z., Liu, D., Kwan, H. K., & Liu, J. (2014). Insiders maintain voice: A psychological safety model of organizational politics. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31(3), 853–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Liang, J., Shu, R., & Farh, C. I. (2019). Differential implications of team member promotive and prohibitive voice on innovation performance in research and development project teams: A dialectic perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(1), 91–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Liang, L., Tian, G., Zhang, X., & Tian, Y. (2024). New voice channel and voice endorsement: How the information displayed on online idea management platforms influences voice endorsement? International Journal of Business Communication. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Liu, C., Yuan, Q., & Luo, J. (2025). Technical anonymity and employees’ willingness to speak up: Influences of voice solicitation, general timeliness, and psychological safety. Management Communication Quarterly, 39(2), 322–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Liu, P., Li, D., & Zhang, X. (2022). Threat from peers: The effect of leaders’ voice endorsement on coworkers’ self-improvement motivation. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 724130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Liu, W., Zhu, R., & Yang, Y. (2010). I warn you because I like you: Voice behavior, employee identifications, and transformational leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 189–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Malik, L. R., Sharma, D., Ghosh, K., & Sahu, A. K. (2024). Impact of organizational politics on employee outcomes: A systematic literature review. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 35(4), 714–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Manz, C. C. (1986). Self-leadership: Toward an expanded theory of self-influence processes in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 585–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. McAllister, C. P., Ellen, B. P., III, & Ferris, G. R. (2018). Social influence opportunity recognition, evaluation, and capitalization: Increased theoretical specification through political skill’s dimensional dynamics. Journal of Management, 44(5), 1926–1952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Mehmood, M. S., Jian, Z., Akram, U., Akram, Z., & Tanveer, Y. (2021). Entrepreneurial leadership and team creativity: The roles of team psychological safety and knowledge sharing. Personnel Review, 51(9), 2404–2425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Meisler, G., Drory, A., & Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2019). Perceived organizational politics and counterproductive work behavior: The mediating role of hostility. Personnel Review, 49(8), 1505–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. Sage. [Google Scholar]
  67. Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, P. F. (2003). An exploratory study of employee silence: Issues that employees don’t communicate upward and why. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1453–1476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102(2), 246–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Morrison, E. W. (2014). Employee voice and silence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 173–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Morrison, E. W. (2023). Employee voice and silence: Taking stock a decade later. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 79–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Mowbray, P. K., Gu, J., Chen, Z., Tse, H. H., & Wilkinson, A. (2024). How do tangible and intangible rewards encourage employee voice? The perspective of dual proactive motivational pathways. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 35(15), 2569–2601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ng, T. W., Lucianetti, L., Hsu, D. Y., Yim, F. H., & Sorensen, K. L. (2021). You speak, I speak: The social-cognitive mechanisms of voice contagion. Journal of Management Studies, 58(6), 1569–1608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Ni, D., Yang, M., & Chen, W. (2024). A dual-path model of observers’ responses to peer voice endorsement: The role of instrumental attribution. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 45(1), 39–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Pearsall, M. J., & Ellis, A. P. (2011). Thick as thieves: The effects of ethical orientation and psychological safety on unethical team behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 401–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Poulton, E. C., Lin, S. H., Fatimah, S., Ho, C. M., Ferris, D. L., & Johnson, R. E. (2024). My manager endorsed my coworkers’ voice: Understanding observers’ positive and negative reactions to managerial endorsement of coworker voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 109(8), 1250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Rubenstein, A. L., Xia, Y., Lan, Y., Morrison, H. M., & Newton, D. W. (2025). Strengthening supervisor bonds but impairing coworker relations? The divergent effects of voice endorsement. Journal of Management, 51(4), 1619–1644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Saei, E., & Liu, Y. (2024). No news is not good news: The mediating role of job frustration in the perceptions of organizational politics and employee silence. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 60(3), 520–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Shao, H., Fu, H., Ge, Y., Jia, W., Li, Z., & Wang, J. (2022). Moderating effects of transformational leadership, affective commitment, job performance, and job insecurity. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 847147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Sherf, E. N., Parke, M. R., & Isaakyan, S. (2021). Distinguishing voice and silence at work: Unique relationships with perceived impact, psychological safety, and burnout. Academy of Management Journal, 64(1), 114–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Shu, M., Zhong, Z., & Ren, H. (2022). Voice contributes to creativity via leaders’ endorsement especially when proposed by extraverted high performance employees. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 15, 213–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Stan, R., & Vîrgă, D. (2021). Psychological needs matter more than social and organizational resources in explaining organizational commitment. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 62(4), 552–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Su, W., & Xie, C. (2023). The impact of organizational politics on work engagement—The mediating role of the doctrine of the mean. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1283855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Tu, Y., Lu, X., Choi, J. N., & Guo, W. (2019). Ethical leadership and team-level creativity: Mediation of psychological safety climate and moderation of supervisor support for creativity. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2), 551–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Tucker, S., & Turner, N. (2015). Sometimes it hurts when supervisors don’t listen: The antecedents and consequences of safety voice among young workers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20(1), 72–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Vigoda, E. (2001). Reactions to organizational politics: A cross-cultural examination in Israel and Britain. Human Relations, 54(11), 1483–1518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Vigoda, E. (2002). Stress-related aftermaths to workplace politics: The relationships among politics, job distress, and aggressive behavior in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(5), 571–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Talmud, I. (2010). Organizational politics and job outcomes: The moderating effect of trust and social support. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(11), 2829–2861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Wang, S., Liu, Y., Lou, Z., & Chen, Y. (2025). The double-edged sword of workplace friendship: Exploring when and how workplace friendship promotes versus inhibits voice behavior. The Journal of General Psychology, 152(1), 1–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Wang, Y., Dai, Y., Li, H., & Song, L. (2021). Social media and attitude change: Information booming promote or resist persuasion? Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 596071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Weiss, M., & Morrison, E. W. (2019). Speaking up and moving up: How voice can enhance employees’ social status. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(1), 5–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Whiting, S. W., Maynes, T. D., Podsakoff, N. P., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Effects of message, source, and context on evaluations of employee voice behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 159–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Wu, S., Kee, D. M. H., Li, D., & Ni, D. (2021). Thanks for your recognition, boss! A study of how and when voice endorsement promotes job performance and voice. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 706501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Xu, M., Qin, X., Dust, S. B., & DiRenzo, M. S. (2019). Supervisor-subordinate proactive personality congruence and psychological safety: A signaling theory approach to employee voice behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(4), 440–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Zhan, X., Wu, J., & Jie, Y. (2025). How and when psychological safety impacts employee innovation: The roles of thriving at work and regulatory focus. Current Psychology, 44(5), 3736–3746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Zhang, L., & Chen, H. (2024). From opportunity to threat: The non-linear relationship between voice frequency and job performance via voice endorsement. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 62(1), e12368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Zhao, N., He, B., & Sun, X. (2024). The contagion of ethical voice among peers: An attribution perspective. Current Psychology, 43(27), 23191–23202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Zhou, Y., & Sun, J. (2024). Perceived organizational politics and employee voice: The role of affect and supervisor political support. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 39(7), 901–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Zhou, Y., & Sun, J. (2025). Perceived organizational politics and employee voice: A resource perspective. Journal of Business Research, 186, 114935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Behavsci 15 00892 g001
Figure 1. Theoretical model.
Figure 1. Theoretical model.
Behavsci 15 00892 g001
Table 1. The distribution of basic characteristics of participants.
Table 1. The distribution of basic characteristics of participants.
ItemsCategoryFrequencyPercentage
GenderMale12053.1%
Female10646.9%
AgeBelow 3011149.1%
31−409542.0%
41−50198.4%
Above 5010.5%
Organizational tenureBelow 1 year3214.2%
1−3 years4821.2%
3−5 years5122.5%
5−10 years6327.9%
Over 10 years3214.2%
Note. N = 226.
Table 2. Results of confirmatory factor analysis.
Table 2. Results of confirmatory factor analysis.
ModelModel Structureχ2dfχ2/dfRMSEACFIIFITLI
Five-factor modelPOP; PS; AC; PVE; ZY786.324541.730.060.910.910.90
Four-factor model 1POP + ZY; PS; AC; PVE1135.164582.480.080.820.820.81
Four-factor model 2POP; PS + AC; PVE; ZY946.264582.070.070.870.870.81
Three-factor modelPOP + ZY; PS + AC; PVE1293.184612.810.090.780.780.76
Single factor modelPOP + PS + AC + PVE + ZY2256.834644.860.130.530.530.49
Note. N = 226. POP = perceived organizational politics; PS = psychological safety; AC = affective commitment; PVE = peer voice endorsement; ZY = Zhongyong.
Table 3. Means, standard deviations, and correlations.
Table 3. Means, standard deviations, and correlations.
VariablesMeanSD12345678
1. Gender1.470.50-
2. Age32.205.24−0.28 **-
3. Organizational tenure6.024.87−0.100.61 **-
4. Zhongyong4.090.470.070.060.13(0.80)
5. POP2.520.88−0.05−0.17 *−0.02−0.03(0.89)
6. Psychological safety3.320.64−0.110.110.100.20 **−0.32 **(0.80)
7. Affective commitment3.580.92−0.050.22 **0.090.16 *−0.56 **0.54 **(0.94)
8. Peer voice endorsement3.650.560.070.120.040.20 **−0.130.30 **0.35 **(0.85)
Note. Gender, 1 = male; 2 = female. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.
Table 4. Results of multiple regression analysis.
Table 4. Results of multiple regression analysis.
Independent VariablesModel 1Model 2Model 3
Psychological SafetyAffective CommitmentPeer Voice Endorsement
Gender−0.15 *−0.050.13 *
Age−0.050.110.14
Organizational tenure0.09−0.01−0.08
Zhongyong0.20 **0.14 **0.11
POP−0.32 ***−0.55 ***0.12
Psychological safety 0.16 *
Affective commitment 0.30 ***
R20.160.360.18
F8.56 ***24.38 ***6.88 ***
Note. N = 226. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
Table 5. Results of indirect effect analysis.
Table 5. Results of indirect effect analysis.
Indirect PathIndirect EffectLLCIULCI
POP-Psychological Safety-Peer Voice
Endorsement		−0.06 *−0.10−0.03
POP-Affective Commitment-Peer Voice
Endorsement		−0.13 *−0.19−0.08
Note. N = 226. * p < 0.05.
Table 6. Summary of hypothesis tests.
Table 6. Summary of hypothesis tests.
Hypothesis NumberHypothesis StatementSupported/Not Supported
H1Perceived organizational politics has a negative impact on employees’ psychological safety.Supported
H2Perceived organizational politics has a negative impact on employees’ affective commitment.Supported
H3Employees’ psychological safety has a positive impact on peer voice endorsement.Supported
H4Employees’ affective commitment has a positive impact on peer voice endorsement.Supported
H5Psychological safety mediates the relationship between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement.Supported
H6Affective commitment mediates the relationship between perceived organizational politics and peer voice endorsement.Supported
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Qiu, P.; Chen, T.; Hu, L.; Zhou, H. The Impact of Perceived Organizational Politics on Peer Voice Endorsement: A Dual Mediation Model. Behav. Sci. 2025, 15, 892. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15070892

AMA Style

Qiu P, Chen T, Hu L, Zhou H. The Impact of Perceived Organizational Politics on Peer Voice Endorsement: A Dual Mediation Model. Behavioral Sciences. 2025; 15(7):892. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15070892

Chicago/Turabian Style

Qiu, Peiwen, Tingjing Chen, Liao Hu, and Hao Zhou. 2025. "The Impact of Perceived Organizational Politics on Peer Voice Endorsement: A Dual Mediation Model" Behavioral Sciences 15, no. 7: 892. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15070892

APA Style

Qiu, P., Chen, T., Hu, L., & Zhou, H. (2025). The Impact of Perceived Organizational Politics on Peer Voice Endorsement: A Dual Mediation Model. Behavioral Sciences, 15(7), 892. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15070892

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop