THE INTRAPERSONAL IMPACT OF ONGOING IDENTITY MANAGEMENT FOR BLACK EMPLOYEES By Courtney M. Bryant A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Psychology—Doctor of Philosophy 2021 ABSTRACT THE INTRAPERSONAL IMPACT OF ONGOING IDENTITY MANAGEMENT FOR BLACK EMPLOYEES By Courtney M. Bryant Researchers agree that individuals with stigmatized identities are constantly managing their identity to proactively counter anticipated discrimination or stigmatization, yet most research considers identity management within a bounded context or in critical incidents. In order to advance the understanding of racial minority experiences at work, I utilize the identity management strategy of identity shifting to examine continual identity management and its effect on authenticity, well-being, and burnout for Black employees. I integrate the identity management literature with the emotional labor literature to conceptualize two forms of identity shifting that more specifically describe the psychological process of identity shifting in the workplace. I propose a conceptual model of identity shifting with antecedents, behaviors, and outcomes and test it using a mixed methods sequential research design. In Phase I, a cross- sectional survey of 284 Black employees provided support for the relationships between an identity-related antecedent, identity shifting, and the outcomes. There was partial support for the relationship between job characteristics and identity shifting. Using qualitative data gathered through semi-structured interviews, the findings of Phase II advanced the conceptual model by identifying additional organizational characteristics that influence identity shifting, expanding the understanding of identity shifting behaviors, classifying other outcomes beyond the intrapersonal, and framing the model within a motivational context. Overall, this research provided support for the study of identity management as a continuous phenomenon. The implications of this research and recommended future directions are discussed. Copyright by COURTNEY M. BRYANT 2021 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I thank God for the strength to make it to this point and all of the blessings that came out of this graduate school journey. There are too many to name, but I am incredibly grateful for the faith, perseverance, and ability to embrace joy that I developed during the years dedicated to my dissertation. I thank and acknowledge my committee members for their role in helping me develop and refine my ideas into a real, scholarly accomplishment: Drs. NiCole Buchanan, Daisy Chang, Fred Leong, and Quinetta Roberson Connally. My dissertation chair and graduate school advisor, Dr. Ann Marie Ryan, has been the single most influential person in my academic career. Thank you, Ann Marie, for pouring into me and shaping me into the doer (and not just the thinker) that I am today. I appreciate your encouraging words, think tanks, and pushes when needed, particularly during this sprint to the finish line. I would not have been able to do all this work without my study buddies and writing partners who were key to my success. The accountability and helpful conversations (and sometimes venting sessions) were exactly what I needed to get me through. Thanks Tatiana Bustos, Kathrina Robotham, Joshua Prasad, and Caitlin Briggs for our shared time together. Thanks also to my awesome research assistants that helped me complete Phase II of this dissertation: Himali Bhandari and Megan Parker. I wish you ladies continued success in your future. This research could not have been completed—quite literally—without the participation of so many wonderful Black people. I thank all of those that passed my solicitation on to others, those that participated in any capacity, and an extra special thank you to those that sat with me iv for an interview. I am so happy that you all trusted me to study your experiences and I am appreciative of the time you gave. There are so many others that helped me reach the milestone of completing this dissertation. The story of how my graduate school career began is a testimony to the way God can align the stars through the sheer kindness of others. When I did not have the research experience needed to get into the graduate programs I really had my eye on, Ann Marie was kind enough to respond to my inquiry about how to improve myself for the next application cycle. She pointed me in the direction of Steven Thomas, who ran the Summer Research Opportunities Program (SROP). Although he had already filled the program, he made room for me to come and study under Ann Marie for the summer. Neither of them knew me at the time and they did not have to respond to my emails or commit their summers to my development, but I am forever grateful that they did; thank you for changing the course of my life. Steven was instrumental in building the communities of support at Michigan State University (MSU) that I leaned on throughout graduate school. Along with my SROP friends, the Alliance for Graduate Education and the Professoriate community provided a place for me to find and engage with scholars and friends across campus that looked like me. Steven, Dr. Pero Dagbovie, and Dr. Antonio Nunez have personally mentored me and ensured I had the network, resources, and moral support to succeed in graduate school, for which I appreciate endlessly. Thanks also to the professors of MSU’s Organizational Psychology program and the visiting scholars for helping me develop the skills I needed to get to this point. My peers provided unmatched support at every step of this journey. Shoutout to my cohort, the Dirty Half Dozen (Jacob Bradburn, Mike Morrison, Jeff Olenick, and Ross Walker)—we all made it! I attribute much of our success to our friendship. I appreciate my other v peers for their support in grad school, especially Danni Gardner, Taylor Lauricella, Jaleah Rutledge, and Kesicia Dickerson. I also never would have made it this far without my peer mentors and friends: Danielle King, Courtney McCluney, Abdifatah Ali, Dia Chatterjee, and Jessica Webb. You all paved the way for me; you don’t know just how much I learned from watching and working with you, both personally and professionally. My community outside of academia was just as vital to my survival and success in graduate school. I appreciate my friends that supported me, celebrated me, held me accountable to my responsibilities, asked deep questions, and didn’t get mad when I couldn’t hang out. I’d especially like to thank Victoria Artis and Ashanti Walker for their unique ways of sending bestie energy my way when needed. Thanks to my Ford family for your continued cheerleading and understanding while I worked at Ford and completed my dissertation. It was really tough to juggle, but you all made it so much easier with your support. None of this would be possible without my family. For my whole life they have always taught me excellence and cheered me on as I forged my own way in the world. This graduate program was no exception, and this time in my life really showed me what our family is made of! My sisters, Nicole Bryant-Dismuke and Brittany Bryant, are my best friends. I know you will always have my back, and that’s never been more clear than now. Words are not enough to thank you for every single thing you’ve done for me—including picking up balls that I dropped and talking me through crises—but you know I’ll be showing my appreciation forever and ever! I owe so much to my parents, who gave me and my siblings an amazing head start in life. They worked so hard to guarantee that we had everything we needed to shine. Not only that, but they were right there in the trenches, helping us to put in the hard work to get to where we were going each time. Daddy (Henry Bryant), thank you for being my IT guy, my car repairman, and vi literally anything I needed. You’re the model for the perfect family man and I couldn’t be here without you. Mommy (Dr. Joan Bryant), you’re the model for everything I want to be. I am forever in awe of you. My dreams would never be so grand if I didn’t witness you take over the world with no fear and no hesitance, with your whole authentic self. You are my superhero, who directly motivated me by asking “How’s your paper coming?” every time I talked to you. Again, there aren’t enough words in the world to thank you both. Last, but certainly not least, I want to thank the love of my life for loving me and growing with me throughout graduate school. I appreciate you, Bobby Shelby, for keeping me in touch with the real world when I was too entrenched in the Ivory Tower to see what’s important in life. Our relationship has been the basis of so much strength and positivity, which has allowed me to be the free, authentic, and confident version of myself in every room I’m in. Thanks for seeing all of me. I’m excited to grow old with you. I am so thankful to those around me that helped make this dissertation and my PhD journey a reality. If I missed anyone, please charge it to my head (and deadlines), not my heart. As I try to practice more self-awareness, I would be remiss if I did not comment on how pleased I am with my own transformation, as well as the outcomes from it that I am able to share with the world. It is my sincere hope that all I have learned and emptied into this dissertation contributes science that incrementally improves the lives of Black employees in the workplace. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... xi LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... xiii Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Literature Review .......................................................................................................... 7 Identity Management................................................................................................................... 7 Identity Shifting......................................................................................................................... 10 Identity Shifting in Organizational Literature ........................................................................... 13 Chapter 3: Model and Hypotheses Development ......................................................................... 17 Identity Integration .................................................................................................................... 18 Emotional Labor........................................................................................................................ 22 Identity Composition and Identity Shifting Behavior ............................................................... 28 Job Characteristics..................................................................................................................... 29 Identity Shifting and Burnout.................................................................................................... 31 Shifting and Authenticity .......................................................................................................... 33 Authenticity and Individual Outcomes ..................................................................................... 34 Testing the Model...................................................................................................................... 35 Chapter 4: Phase I Methodology................................................................................................... 36 Participants ................................................................................................................................ 36 Procedure ................................................................................................................................... 38 Measures.................................................................................................................................... 39 Burnout .................................................................................................................................. 39 Well-Being............................................................................................................................. 39 Authenticity ........................................................................................................................... 40 Identity Shifting ..................................................................................................................... 40 Identity Integration ................................................................................................................ 41 Frequency and Duration of Interacting With Others ............................................................. 42 COVID-19 Controls .............................................................................................................. 43 Demographics ........................................................................................................................ 43 Chapter 5: Phase I Results ............................................................................................................ 45 Initial Analyses .......................................................................................................................... 45 Hypotheses Testing ................................................................................................................... 46 Hypotheses H1a and H1b ...................................................................................................... 47 Hypotheses H2a-f .................................................................................................................. 47 Hypotheses H3a-c .................................................................................................................. 49 Hypotheses H3d and H4 ........................................................................................................ 50 viii Hypotheses H5a and H5b ...................................................................................................... 51 Exploratory Analyses ................................................................................................................ 52 Overall Model ........................................................................................................................ 52 Pathways Within the Model .................................................................................................. 53 Manifestation and Suppression .............................................................................................. 54 Multidimensional Model of Racial Identity .......................................................................... 56 Phase I Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 57 Areas of Opportunity for Phase II ......................................................................................... 58 Chapter 6: Phase II Methodology ................................................................................................. 60 Phase II ...................................................................................................................................... 60 Participants ............................................................................................................................ 60 Procedures ............................................................................................................................. 62 Measures ................................................................................................................................ 63 Interview Questions. .......................................................................................................... 63 A Priori Coding Scheme. ................................................................................................... 64 Chapter 7: Phase II Results ........................................................................................................... 66 Coding ....................................................................................................................................... 67 How Participants Identity Shift ............................................................................................. 67 Language. ........................................................................................................................... 67 Appearance. ....................................................................................................................... 69 Personality.......................................................................................................................... 72 Self-Disclosure. .................................................................................................................. 73 Why Participants Identity Shift ............................................................................................. 75 Maintaining Generational Safety Practices. ....................................................................... 75 To Fit In/Assimilate. .......................................................................................................... 76 Fear Of Being Judged/Stereotyped. ................................................................................... 77 To Achieve Professional Success. ..................................................................................... 79 The Effects of Identity Shifting ............................................................................................. 80 Personally. .......................................................................................................................... 81 Professionally. .................................................................................................................... 83 Interpersonally. .................................................................................................................. 84 Organizational Influences on Identity Shifting ..................................................................... 86 Organizational leaders. ...................................................................................................... 86 Culture................................................................................................................................ 87 Demographics. ................................................................................................................... 87 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 87 Chapter 8: Discussion ................................................................................................................... 91 Phase I and Phase II Results Discussion ................................................................................... 91 Antecedents ........................................................................................................................... 91 Identity Shifting ..................................................................................................................... 93 Individual Outcomes.............................................................................................................. 95 ix Concepts Outside of the Model ............................................................................................. 96 Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 97 Implications ............................................................................................................................... 99 Future Studies .......................................................................................................................... 101 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 104 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................ 105 APPENDIX A: Phase I Informed Consent ............................................................................. 106 APPENDIX B: Phase I Measures ........................................................................................... 109 APPENDIX C: Invitation to Participate in Phase II ............................................................... 122 APPENDIX D: Phase II Informed Consent ............................................................................ 124 APPENDIX E: Phase II Interview Protocol ............................................................................ 127 APPENDIX F: Tables ............................................................................................................. 130 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 159 x LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, Alpha Coefficients, and Bivariate Correlations of Measures ..................................................................................................................................................... 131 Table 2 Confirmatory Factor Analyses of Surface Shifting and Deep Shifting ......................... 133 Table 3 Hypothesis H1a: Regressing Identity Integration Onto Surface Shifting ...................... 134 Table 4 Hypothesis H1b: Regressing Identity Integration Onto Deep Shifting ......................... 135 Table 5 Hypothesis H2a: Regressing the Frequency of Interacting With Others Onto Surface Shifting........................................................................................................................................ 136 Table 6 Hypothesis H2b: Regressing the Duration of Interacting With Others Onto Surface Shifting........................................................................................................................................ 137 Table 7 Hypothesis H2c: Regressing the Frequency of Interacting With Others Onto Deep Shifting........................................................................................................................................ 138 Table 8 Hypothesis H2d: Regressing the Duration of Interacting With Others Onto Deep Shifting ..................................................................................................................................................... 139 Table 9 Hypothesis H2e: Regressing the Frequency of Interacting With Others Onto Burnout (Emotional Exhaustion, Cynicism, Professional Efficacy)......................................................... 140 Table 10 Hypothesis H2f: Regressing the Duration of Interacting With Others Onto Burnout (Emotional Exhaustion, Cynicism, Professional Efficacy)......................................................... 142 Table 11 Hypothesis H3a: Regressing Surface Shifting Onto Emotional Exhaustion ............... 144 Table 12 Hypothesis H3b: Regressing Surface Shifting Onto Cynicism ................................... 145 Table 13 Hypothesis H3c: Regressing Surface Shifting Onto Professional Efficacy ................ 146 Table 14 Hypothesis H3d: Regressing Surface Shifting Onto Authenticity............................... 147 Table 15 Hypothesis H4: Regressing Deep Shifting Onto Authenticity .................................... 148 Table 16 Hypothesis H5a: Regressing Authenticity Onto Well-Being Using the WEMWBS Scale as the Well-Being Measure ......................................................................................................... 149 Table 17 Hypothesis H5a: Regressing Authenticity Onto Well-Being Using the One-Item Job Satisfaction Question .................................................................................................................. 150 xi Table 18 Hypothesis H5a: Regressing Authenticity Onto Well-Being Using the Work-Related Needs Satisfaction Scale ............................................................................................................. 151 Table 19 Regressing Authenticity onto Burnout (Emotional Exhaustion, Cynicism, Professional Efficacy) ...................................................................................................................................... 153 Table 20 Codes, Frequencies, and Exemplar Quotes ................................................................. 155 xii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 The Conceptual Model of Intrapersonal Consequences of Identity Shifting ................. 17 xiii Chapter 1: Introduction “I just have to be normal Starr at normal Williamson and have a normal day. That means flipping the switch in my brain so I’m Williamson Starr. Williamson Starr doesn’t use slang––if a rapper would say it, she doesn’t say it, even if her white friends do. Slang makes them cool. Slang makes her “hood.” Williamson Starr holds her tongue when people piss her off so nobody will think she’s the “angry black girl.” Williamson Starr is approachable. No stank-eyes, side-eyes, none of that. Williamson Starr is nonconfrontational. Basically, Williamson Starr doesn’t give anyone a reason to call her ghetto. I can’t stand myself for doing it, but I do it anyway.” —Starr in Angie Thomas’s The Hate U Give (pg. 71) “I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others, rather than to be false, and to incur my own abhorrence.” —Frederick Douglass The identity management literature has had a significant influence in understanding how individuals cope when facing stigmatization for their identity, particularly in the workplace (Kulich et al., 2017; Shih et al., 2013). Similar to impression management, individuals with stigmatized identities may strategically self-present in a manner that influences specific targets to see the actor in the way they want to be seen (Bolino et al., 2016; Goffman, 1963; Jones & Pittman, 1982). However, unlike impression management, individuals that identity manage are aware that there is an existing stigma about their identity and are actively trying to avoid discrimination and stigmatization (Goffman, 1963; Shih et al., 2013). Like the main character Starr in Angie Thomas’s novel The Hate U Give (see above quotation), minorities are acutely aware of the stereotypes about them and can be hypervigilant in their concerns not to activate them (Beilock, et al., 2007; Forbes, et al., 2008). Identity management research has given insight into how minorities with visible (e.g., Lyons, et al., 2018), invisible (e.g., Chaudior & Fisher, 2010; Ragins, 2008), and multiple (e.g., Ramarajan, 2014) stigmatized identities navigate the workplace. 1 The empirical research on identity management has often focused on identifying the strategies those with stigmatized identities use (e.g., Button, 2004; Taub et al., 2004) and/or the effectiveness of said strategies within a bounded context (e.g., Lyons et al., 2018; Singletary & Hebl, 2009). For example, Ruggs and colleagues (2019) examined the most effective identity management strategies for reducing subtle forms of discrimination in a job interview. They observed that Black individuals found racial acknowledgement to be more effective than did White individuals, and that Black individuals experienced positive emotions (joy, authenticity) from using humor and racial affirmation strategies. In addition to contextualized events like an interview, research also evaluates strategies for combating incidents of identity threat or stereotyping. Holmes, Lopiano, and Hall (2019) review the existing literature on using identity management for micro-interventions during incidents of interpersonal discrimination, citing strategies such as humor, avoidance, and affiliation. However, researchers agree that minorities are constantly managing their identity to proactively counter anticipated discrimination or stigmatization. Several proposed identity management strategies require consistent management, such as identity redefinition (changing the meaning of an identity within an organization through stereotype reassociation and stereotype regeneration; Shih et al., 2013) or covering (making an effort to mute the significance of a particular stigmatized identity; Yoshino & Smith, 2013). Roberts (2005) suggested that minority employees utilize social identity-based impression management strategies to construct a professional image that is associated with positive images or distanced from negative images of their social identity group. Research outside of the identity management domain also highlights ways that minorities construct a professional identity using identity management techniques, which would require constant monitoring of the stigmatized identity. For example, Rosette and 2 Dumas (2008) and Rosado (2003) explore the politics of hair and hairstyles in the workplace for African American women by discussing the relationship between societal norms of aesthetics and professionalism and the uniquely gendered and racialized decision of how Black women choose to wear their hair. As another example, Zhao and Biernat (2018) analyze the effect of ethnic minorities and foreign employees adopting Anglo names to make interactions with coworkers easier. A popularly known demonstration of this continual identity management is minorities adopting a speech pattern that is aligned with organizational lingo and does not signal ethnicity (Cross & Strauss, 1998). Despite the popular notion that forms of identity management require constant management, the empirical research on identity management almost exclusively focuses on strategies enacted within bounded contexts or in response to a single stigmatizing event (e.g., encountering identity threat, interpersonal discrimination; Ruggs et al., 2011). In order to advance the understanding of minority experiences at work, I build on the previous identity management work by examining the psychological and workplace outcomes of continual identity management rather than identity management within a bounded context or a single event. More specifically, I utilize the identity management strategy of identity shifting to examine the effect of continual identity management on burnout and well-being. Identity shifting is defined as switching to behaviors that align with the cultural norms of an environment from the behaviors of the individual’s cultural norms, particularly in response to anticipated, perceived, or received stigmatization or discrimination (Dickens et al., 2019; Jackson, 2002). By operationalizing identity shifting rather than other types of identity presentation techniques, this research asserts a transitional mechanism with which individuals move between non-work identities and a professional identity, enabling the differentiation between identity management behavior and non-identity management behavior. 3 While identity shifting is the phenomenon of focus, I introduce emotional labor as an explanatory mechanism for the process of identity shifting. Emotional labor was originally conceptualized as the management of publicly observable emotion in an outward facing occupation in which there are requirements of display (Hochchild, 1983). The definition has been further clarified to refer to the integrated processes of emotion requirements, emotion regulation, and emotion performance to satisfy customers (Grandey & Gabriel, 2015). As will be discussed later, elements of emotion labor bear conceptual and empirical similarities to identity management, offering new areas of expansion for the identity management literature. The present paper integrates the identity management and emotional labor literatures through the presentation of new constructs that not only capture the processes of expressing emotion, but also the process of expressing identity to others. Operationalizing the process of identity shifting with emotional labor advances the study of individuals with visible stigmatized identities in the workplace in two ways. First, this research merges two distinct but connected literatures, which will contribute a more comprehensive perspective on the experience of minorities at work. The emotional labor literature evidences antecedents, processes, and outcomes of the “work” required to manage an image in the workplace that can inform the way that we examine the process of identity management. By identifying parallels between identity management and emotional labor, I operationalize identity shifting in a way that is more encompassing of everyday behavior than research on identity management within a bounded context. I propose new constructs that integrate elements of both emotional labor and identity management to more specifically describe the experience of individuals with visible stigmatized identities that engage in continual identity management. This approach reveals more about the individual’s overall experience than 4 past research on identity shifting. Thus, the conceptual model presented contributes a unique view of minority experiences in the workplace. Secondly, this research will contribute quantitative evidence to the identity shifting literature. Though most identity management research tends to be experimental or quantitative, research on identity shifting has been mainly theoretical and qualitative. Previous identity shifting literature has highlighted important outcomes (e.g., Dickens & Chavez, 2018) but has yet to connect constructs that describe the psychological processes of identity shifting. The present paper seeks to provide support for the previously proposed relationships using a mixed methodology that both builds on existing qualitative data and offers new quantitative data that can inform future research on identity shifting. Research into minority experiences in the workplace is important for several reasons. This research may identify differences in workplace experiences that contribute to our understanding of existing disparities between majority and minority groups in the workplace such as the number of people holding high level leadership positions (United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2020), pay equity (United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019), and even well-being related to work (Leong et al., 2017). This research may also help to identify actionable recommendations for organizations that improve the experience of minorities in their workplace. The present research begins with a literature review of the identity management literature, specifically delving into identity shifting in Chapter 2. Next, in Chapter 3, I present a conceptual model of identity shifting that details individual differences, behaviors, and outcomes. Within the model proposal is a short literature review of emotional labor that is paralleled with the identity management literature. I hypothesize the relationships between the 5 constructs in the model and briefly review the research design. Chapters 4 and 5 include the methods and results sections for Phase I and Chapters 6 and 7 include the methods and results sections for Phase II. Finally, in Chapter 8 I discuss Phase I and Phase II together, along with the limitations and implications of the research before suggesting future research directions. 6 Chapter 2: Literature Review Identity Management Identity management has been called several different names across studies. Stigma management (Taub et al., 2004), compensatory strategies (Singletary & Hebl, 2009), social identity-based impression management strategies (Roberts, 2005), self-disclosure (Chaudior & Fisher, 2010) and identity management (Jones & King, 2014) all refer to the strategic presentation of oneself to reduce formal or informal discrimination due to a stigmatized identity, particularly in the workplace. There are two common theories that underlie identity management: social identity theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and stigma theory (Goffman, 1963). Social identity theory suggests that when an individual’s social identity or value is threatened, they may engage in tactics to manage or cope with that identity (Niens & Cairns, 2003; Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Stigma theory asserts that individuals with stigmatized identities seek to avoid discrimination and improve their life chances by strategically managing their identity (Goffman, 1963). Goffman’s (1963) demarcation of types of stigmas has led to a bifurcation in the literature into work on visible stigmatized identities and invisible stigmatized identities. Commonly studied visible stigmatized identities are race, gender, physical disabilities, age, and obesity. Visible stigmas in the workplace are characterized by a lower status in society, a numerical minority, stereotypes or devaluation in a particular context, or an otherwise readily identifiable physical abnormality. The focus of identity management for a person with a visible stigmatized identity is either reducing stigmatization or destigmatizing their identity to others so that they may be seen and treated as equal, part of the in-group, or valued for their workplace contributions. There are numerous types of strategies in the literature. Some strategies focus on outwardly managing others’ impressions per stigma theory (Goffman, 1963), such as verbally 7 acknowledging the stigma (e.g., Hebl & Kleck, 2002; Lyons et al., 2018), combating the stigma by presenting counter stereotypical traits (e.g., Wessel et al., 2015), or overcompensating for the stigma by working harder or longer (Cassel & Walsh, 1997). Other strategies may be related to how the individual views and values his or her identities per social identity theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1979) such as stereotype reassociation (Shih et al., 2013) or deemphasizing a negatively valued identity and emphasizing a more positively valued identity (Shih et al., 2013). On the other hand, religion, criminal record, mental illness, and sexual orientation are the most commonly studied invisible stigmatized identities, with sexual orientation becoming a major topic in this literature. Similar to visible stigmas, invisible stigmas may be characterized by a lower status in society, a numerical minority, stereotypes, or devaluation in a particular context. However, they also may be characterized by “blemishes of individual character” (Goffman, 1963) and are viewed as more controllable than visible stigmas. The focus of this research is often about the disclosure process: if, when, and how one should reveal their invisible identity to others. Rather than only a dichotomous decision to reveal or conceal, researchers identify strategies for revealing (e.g., advocating, educating; Button, 2004), concealing (e.g., counterfeiting, avoiding; Woods et al., 1993), and even for testing the waters for safety or support (e.g., signaling; Jones et al., 2014). Scholars have more recently considered additional identities that may not be classified as invisible or visible, but instead as a dynamic identity that can evolve or change from invisible to visible or vice versa. For example, pregnancy, chronic or acute illnesses (e.g., addiction, cancer; sudden hospitalization), and mental illnesses are all conditions that may be dynamic and have unique identity management processes. 8 Though identity management has primarily focused on one identity at a time, scholars have also proposed theoretical and empirical work that speaks to multiple identities. Some broaden their theories so that identity management strategies can be applied across an individual’s multiple identities (e.g., Ramarajan, 2014). For example, Shih, Young, and Brucher (2013) suggest that an individual can use the strategy of recategorization across any of their relevant and applicable identities in order to reduce bias (Shih et al., 2013). Other scholars use an intersectional approach and only consider the unique experiences of a specific combination of identities (e.g., Dickens et al., 2018). Bell (1990) focused exclusively on Black women’s experience in the workplace because of their double minority statuses. The outcomes of identity management strategies across stigma types (visible, invisible, other; Goffman, 1963) vary widely across many additional dimensions: type of social identity (i.e., obesity vs. physical disability; Hebl & Kleck, 2002), controllability of the stigma (Lyons et al., 2017), nature of the relationship with the audience (Taub et al., 2004), personal characteristics (i.e., identity centrality; Sellers et al., 1998), and characteristics of the context or interaction (King et al., 2017). While there may be commonalities across social identities, the identity management literature does not have known “truths” that exist across all conditions. For example, research suggests that acknowledging visible disabilities has a more positive impact than not acknowledging or downplaying the disability (Lyons et al., 2018). However, acknowledgement does not have the same positive impact for other perceivability uncontrollable (e.g., racial minorities; Ruggs et al., 2019) or controllable (e.g., obesity, Hebl & Kleck, 2002) visible stigmas. Overall, outcomes from the identity management literature tend to be applicable only to the focal social identity group. 9 Identity Shifting One of the many identity management strategies is identity shifting. Identity shifting is characterized by shifting between dominant culture behaviors (dominant in that person’s workplace or dominant in society) and behaviors of the individual’s culture of origin for the purpose of avoiding or counteracting stigmatization or discrimination (Dickens & Chavez, 2018; Jackson, 2002). Identity shifting research tends to be focused on visible stigmatized identities because the shift in behavior is often to thwart reactions based on a visible identity (i.e., racial/ethnic minorities). The idea of shifting between more than one self specifically because of a stigmatized identity has been studied more broadly in various literatures, including sociology, sociolinguistics, and cross-cultural psychology. Identity shifting can be traced back as far as W.E.B. Dubois (1903), who coined the term “double consciousness” to represent the feeling of having two selves: a Black self and an American self. Due to the racism in that historical era, the two identities were not cohesively tied, causing Black Americans to have “two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body…” (p. 2). Contemporarily, the evidence for individuals switching between two or more identities has been rooted in literature exploring bicultural identities, particularly in regard to language. Different models of biculturalism offer explanations for the psychological processes and social experiences of individuals with more than one cultural identity. Berry (1990) presumed there were two opposing tensions facing bicultural individuals that determined their acculturation process (Benet-Martinez & Haritatos, 2005). First, one must decide how much they are motivated or allowed to retain identification with their original culture (which is the minority culture). Second, one must decide how much they are motivated or allowed to identify with the dominant culture. These tensions persist throughout most acculturation models and into the 10 identity management literature. Lafromboise, Coleman, and Gerton (1993) summarized five models of biculturalism that reflect different levels of these opposing tensions, including assimilation, acculturation, alternation, multiculturalism, and fusion. The alternation model in particular provides a foundation for identity shifting. In the alternation model of biculturalism, an individual moves between two cultures that have been deemed of equal status, using the language, behavior, and cognition appropriate for each. Unlike most other bicultural models, the alternation model does not assume a hierarchy between cultures, allowing the individual to maintain a positive and bidirectional relationship with both cultures without having to choose between them. Lafromboise and colleagues (1993) present early qualitative research that implies that the alternation model has better outcomes for individuals than the assimilation and acculturation models of biculturalism because the individual has the power to choose how he or she will interact with each culture. While the alternation model is the best match as the foundation of identity shifting, there are important aspects from the other models that inform present day thinking. In particular the acculturation model has two important defining characteristics: the bicultural individual can become a competent participant in the majority culture but will always be identified as a member of the minority culture; and there is an involuntary basis of acculturation because the minority group is forced to learn the new culture for economic survival. LaFromboise and colleagues review a list of studies on acculturation and conclude that these two factors likely contribute to the stressful nature of acculturation. Both of these factors- minority group identification and necessity- underlie assumptions of identity management and identity shifting. The alternation model parallels linguistics research on “code-switching”, or how bilingual individuals switch between the use of two (or more) languages in one interaction 11 (Heller, 1988; Parama et al., 2017). Code-switching research contributed to the linguistics literature on the cognitive abilities needed for bilingualism, language acquisition, and language processes, uncovering universals across languages and more (Heller, 1988; Parama et al., 2017). The research evolved to the socio-linguistic and multicultural fields as scholars noted the importance of the cognitive and social determinants of using two languages (e.g., Breitborde, 1983; Braga, 1983). Several studies investigate the relationship between language code- switching and identity or meaning making (e.g., Bhatt, 2008; De Fina, 2007; Ramírez-Esparza et al., 2006). Hong and colleagues (2000) conceptualized the term frame-switching as “shifts between interpretive frames rooted in different cultures in response to cues in the social environment” (Hong et al., 2000; LaFromboise et al., 1993). In their study, they found that bicultural individuals switched cultural frames in response to prominent cultural symbols (Hong et al., 2000). Additional work supports the use of symbols as primers (not solely language) and that cognitive frames are uniquely held by individuals in the culture, not just those that can speak the language of a culture (Luna et al., 2008). The multicultural literature helped to establish the importance of context (i.e., cultural symbols or priming) in eliciting not only conscious behaviors (as is the case for language), but also cognition and affect tied to a specific identity. More recent research in the cross-cultural psychology literature shows that shifting between identities (termed cultural variability in this line of work) can have both positive and negative effects on individuals. In two studies, Ferguson and colleagues (2017) found that cultural variability can be a double-edged sword that affects social groups differently (e.g., friends vs. family) and varies across degrees of cultural integration (e.g., first and second generations vs. third generations). This research emphasizes the role of individual differences in 12 identity in understanding how identity shifting can be beneficial or detrimental for minorities in the workplace. Black Psychology scholars study the use of identity shifting in response to a stigmatized identity, rather than just contextual clues of culturally appropriate behavior. Contextual clues may signal stigmatization, such as others’ racial anxiety, which then triggers individuals to behave in a way that reduces the racial anxiety of others in order to receive fair treatment (Cross & Strauss, 1998). Importantly, this research stream continued to build on the notion that racial minorities in the same country as racial majority members have their own subculture in which identity is built, giving them bicultural experiences such as whether they should and can assimilate or acculturate into the dominant society (Bell, 1990; Cross & Strauss, 1998; Dubois, 1903; Thelamour & Johnson, 2017). Cross and Straus (1998) specifically speak to how identity shifting may be a “performance” that, if inauthentic, will be draining and resource reducing for the individual. Past research on identity shifting in other fields provides a rich foundation on which the organizational literature can build upon. It also points to areas of interests that have not yet been considered in the organizational literature. Namely, this research emphasizes how identity and culture are major determinants of identity shifting and its outcomes. It also offers a groundwork for psychological outcomes that may be influential on employees and their work attitudes. In the next section, I review the existing research on identity shifting in the organizational sciences. Identity Shifting in Organizational Literature Within the organizational literature, code-switching has been conceptualized similarly to identity shifting but with some important differences. Molinsky (2007) describes cross-cultural code-switching as “the act of purposefully modifying one's behavior in an interaction in a foreign 13 setting in order to accommodate different cultural norms for appropriate behavior.” (pg. 624). Molinsky’s (2007) focus was on single interactions that new expatriates experience when making cultural adaptations abroad. He contends that to qualify as cross-cultural code-switching, the interaction must either include unfamiliar norms or the individual must experience a conflict between internal values and the values of the other culture. Unfamiliarity and value conflict are not qualifications for identity shifting. In a given interaction, individuals may be familiar with the expected norms, and they are not in conflict with the values of non-work identities, but still require a move from a non-work identity to a professional identity in order to fulfill the requirements for appropriate cultural behavior. Minority women in a leadership position are a prime example. Their tenure in the organization and position as a leader make them familiar with the expected norms of the organization and their personal values may align well with the organization and position. Yet, research still finds that due to hypervisibility and role incongruence, minority women still alter their behavior to accommodate norms that exist because of their stigmatized identity (Dickens et al., 2019; Settles et al., 2019). Anicich and Hirsh (2017) present vertical code-switching, which they define as “the act of alternating between behavioral patterns directed toward higher-power and lower-power interaction partners.” (p. 663). They specifically characterize organizational power dynamics as an influential factor in role-based identity that influence behavior, emotion, and attention in unique ways for employees that occupy middle-level positions. While role-based identity has and can certainly contribute to the creation of an identity (i.e., teacher identity; Wessel et al., 2020), I would argue that a role-based identity does not have a unique cultural pattern that differs from an overall work identity. Importantly, the motivating factor for switching between high and low power interaction partners is not the same as the motivating factors for other identity 14 management studies. In these studies, individuals lack the stigmatization of identity or threat of discrimination, which would suggest vastly different outcomes for the individual. The research on identity shifting has been entirely qualitative in nature. Bell (1990) described how professional Black women felt they live a bicultural experience because their communities and non-work lives were lived and rooted in their own culture, yet their career anchored them in ‘white society’ that had a different set of norms, traditions, and values. These women had different bicultural life structures, or ways for organizing the two cultural contexts in which they lived, which included how fluidly they moved from one to the other. In the more expansive version of this study, the book “Our Separate Ways” by Bell and Nkomo (2001) encapsulated the life histories of 120 Black and White female managers. The authors note important differences between the women, including how some of the Black women (but none of the White women) felt they must assimilate to gain acceptance: “They have to literally lose their blackness for white colleagues to feel comfortable with them. White-dominated organizations often make cultural assimilation the price of acceptability for racial minorities.” Thus, the Black women in the study formed a professional identity within their organizations to easily move between their two cultural contexts. Two decades later additional qualitative work on Black women in the workplace expands the work of identity shifting to more thoroughly assess the outcomes associated with identity shifting. Dickens and Chavez (2018) used interviews of Black early career professional women to identify both benefits and costs of identity shifting. The benefits of identity shifting were mostly career related, including building relationships with people of the majority group, dissolving race-based perceptions, and enhancing career development. The costs of identity shifting were mostly psychological costs, including mentally “checking out” to avoid 15 confrontation, feelings of inauthenticity due to assimilation, and anxiety and frustration from having to constantly negotiate identity. The present work seeks to extend the qualitative work in this area through the conceptualization of the psychological processes of ongoing identity shifting. In the next chapter, I propose a model of identity shifting relating identity, identity shifting, and outcomes. 16 Chapter 3: Model and Hypotheses Development To understand how identity shifting affects the individual, I present a conceptual model of the intrapersonal consequences of identity shifting in Figure 1. This model proposes relationships that potentially accounts for the ongoing nature of identity shifting. It is important to highlight that this model is meant to build on the existing qualitative research on identity shifting that has centered Black women. To uphold the assumptions of the previous research (discussed throughout the model review) and test new ones, the model is focused on Black employees, but may be generalized to other visible stigmatized identities. The relationships in the model presented are likely different if applied to individuals with invisible stigmatized identities (Riggle et al., 2017). Figure 1 The Conceptual Model of Intrapersonal Consequences of Identity Shifting The model first presents the individual difference ‘identity integration’, which is defined here as the relationship between one’s racial identity and their professional identity. The relationship between the identities determines the degree to which the individual engages in each type of identity shifting (‘surface shifting’ or ‘deep shifting’), which in turn can directly affect 17 individual outcomes or indirectly affect outcomes through authenticity. The job characteristics of ‘frequency of interacting with others’ (seen in the model as just ‘frequency’) and ‘duration of interacting with others’ (seen in the model as just ‘duration’) are conceptualized to also predict the degree to which the individual engages in each type of identity shifting and the expected outcomes. The outcomes of interest in this model are the intrapersonal outcomes of well-being and workplace burnout. Next, I will present each component of the model separately with supporting literature. I will then hypothesize about each of the relationships depicted in the model. Identity Integration Work and non-work selves can develop as staunchly divided parts of identity (Kanter, 1977; Ramarajan & Reid, 2013). The work context provides a unique source of relationships with others, pride and self-esteem, and patterns of cognition that make work a central domain for the construction of identity (Dutton et al., 2010). Work may serve as an especially distinctive environment for minority employees in which they must build an identity that both copes with their stigmatization and also seeks professional success. Though all employees may seek to create a professional identity, racial minorities in particular may need to develop different behavioral (and possibly affective and cognitive) patterns than those in the majority group because traditional American workplaces have organizational norms that are determined by majority members leading to patriarchal, Eurocentric, heterosexual norms (Rosette & Dumas, 2008; Taylor et al., 2011) that differ from the cultural norms of racial minorities. Minorities may use racial identity management behaviors to construct a professional image that actively protects against discrimination (Ibarra, 1999; Roberts, 2005) and over time, individuals develop a 18 professional identity that has behaviors, attitudes, and cognitions that are uniquely different from their racial identity. Research within and outside of organizational literature would suggest that it is imperative to study how the individual conceptualizes his or her important identities relative to one another to understand the experience of identity shifting (Benet-Martinez, et al., 2002; Brook et al., 2008; Ramarajan, 2014). In particular, understanding the relationship between one’s racial minority identity and their professional identity provides information about the type of identity shifting one engages in and the effect of that shifting. Past research on minority identity has often included racial identity centrality as a stable personality characteristic (e.g., Capers & Smith, 2016; Ellis et al., 2018; Settles, 2004; Stryker & Serpe, 1994), which describes the degree to which race defines one’s self-concept (Roberts et al., 2014; Sellers et al., 1998). However, focusing on only one identity limits the understanding of how the enactment of other identities affects behaviors or outcomes. Researchers have urged for more intersectional approaches that reflect multiple identities and their relationship to each other (Jones & Day, 2018; Ramarajan, 2014; Settles, 2006). Some progressive approaches to measuring multiple identities include measuring the centrality of more than one identity at a time (e.g., Capers & Smith, 2016; Roberts et al., 2014) or identifying the relationship between identities (e.g., Henderson et al., 2018; Jones & Day, 2018; Settles, 2006). I chose to analyze Identity Integration, which describes the relationship between two identities (Benet-Martinez et al., 2002), the identities here being one’s racial identity and professional identity. Identity Integration shows the extent to which two identities are compatible and integrated, which will give more information about the psychological experience of moving between identities through identity shifting than would measuring the centrality of both 19 identities. In fact, the conceptualization of identity integration stems from the cultural frame switching literature in which Benet-Martinez and colleagues (2002) propose that the bicultural identity integration (as a result of one’s acculturation experience) influences cultural frame switching. The identity integration work has evolved to compare many different types of identities and many different outcomes. In the workplace, identity integration has been related to greater professional acceptance, creativity, job satisfaction, performance, and optimism (Cheng, Sanchez-Burks et al., 2008; Darling et al., 2007; Tragaki & Smith, 2010). It has also been connected to specific workplace behaviors (Cheng, Sanders et al., 2008). For example, sexual minority leaders with low identity integration between their sexual identity and professional identity use different leadership styles than sexual minority leaders with high identity integration, which affects the relationship that they have with employees (Henderson et al., 2018). Identity Integration also boasts personal benefits such as wellbeing, self-efficacy, and self-esteem (Chen et al., 2008; Crawford et al., 2002; Operario et al., 2008; Schwartz et al., 2015). The two dimensions that indicate identity integration are conflict and distance. Benet- Martinez and Haritatos (2005) found that the two dimensions are psychometrically independent from one another and have different antecedents, including personality characteristics and acculturation stressors. Conflict between identities occurs when one experiences internal distress or turmoil (that may be manifested several ways) that may occur when one identity experiences marginality or power differentials (particularly if it is because of another identity), expectations of identity competency (i.e., linguistic acculturation pressure), or when identities have incompatible values or beliefs (Benet-Martinez & Haritatos, 2005; Hewlin, 2003; LaFromboise et al., 1993; Ramarajan, 2014). One’s context may also produce conflict by presenting display rules (O’Brian & Linehan, 2019) or identity-based expectations in which individuals feel they 20 must choose one identity (with its unique set of values or beliefs) over another (Ramarajan & Reid, 2013; Settles, 2004). This internal conflict causes individuals to suppress or even invalidate other important identities (Ashforth et al., 2008, Hewlin, 2009). While conflict suggest a lack of harmony between identities, distance describes the degree to which identities overlap in meaning or are compartmentalized (Benet-Martinez & Haritatos, 2005; Cheng, Sanders, et al., 2008). Distance can be measured using mental or physical boundaries around life segments where high distance suggests having distinct boundaries and low distance suggest having a lack of boundaries, similar to Bell’s (1990) construct of life structures. Scholars have proposed and demonstrated that low distance, indicated by the alignment of professional identities with other non-work identities, affects intrapsychic consequences such as individual well-being and perceptions of authenticity (Clair et al., 2005; Ramarajan & Reid, 2013; Roberts, 2005). The reviewed research supports that identity integration between one’s racial identity and one’s professional identity can impact behavior at work and intrapsychic consequences. Past research, however, has not directly described how these relationships relate to identity shifting behaviors or the outcomes of those behaviors. In order to provide a framework for understanding identity shifting behaviors as a result of the relationship between identities, I parallel the experience of identity shifting with emotional labor. Identity management literature has been tied to the emotional labor literature as they share similar antecedents and consequences. For example, O’Brian and Linehan (2019) connect having multiple identities to the experiences of emotional dissonance and emotional labor. To directly connect the two topics, I first review the emotional labor literature while relating it to the identity management literature. Next, I propose two constructs that fuse the emotional labor literature and identity shifting literature to better 21 describe and predict the behaviors and outcomes of identity shifting. Lastly, I propose hypotheses that connect the constructs in my model. Emotional Labor In her book The Managed Heart (1983), Hochchild first conceptualized emotional labor as “the management of feeling to create a publicly observable facial and bodily display” (p. 7), especially when the feelings are related to value creation for profit in the service industry. For example, in “service with a smile” servers’ pleasantries are directly tied to the profitability of the company through customer experience. Hochchild used the dramaturgical perspective of work, citing Goffman’s (1959) book The Presentation of Self. Similarly, both identity management and impression management get their origins from Goffman, though stigma theory originated from his next book, Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity (1963). A recent review of the emotional labor literature by Grandey and Gabriel (2015) has identified three components of emotional labor that embody the integrated process of emotional labor but have largely been studied or measured separately: emotional requirements, emotion regulation, and emotion performance. Emotional requirements refer to high demands for the display of emotion within a job. Most research on emotional requirements evaluate jobs in which the goal is to show positive emotions and hide negative ones (e.g., waiting tables) but some job requirements may have goals to show neutral (e.g., judge) or negative (e.g., security guard) emotions. Research in this area primarily focuses on employee perceptions of display requirements (Diefendorff et al., 2006; Kammeyer-Mueller et al., 2013). Though not dictated by a job, minorities that manage their identity do so in response to perceived emotional or identity requirements dictated by the dominant culture within their organization or society. Minorities are aware of the stereotypes about them (Huynh et al., 2011), which creates perceived identity 22 requirements to be accepted in the workplace. Although these requirements are seemingly self- imposed, psychological research has long stated the negative effects of stereotypes. Recent research on the “angry Black woman stereotype” found support for stereotype activation as an underlying mechanism for internal attributions of anger for Black women, which then led to worse performance reviews and assessments of leadership capability compared to others in the workplace (Motro, Evans, Ellis, & Benson, 2021). Carbado and Gulati (2013) imply that African Americans that work in predominantly white institutions create racial criteria which indicate the continuum for signaling ‘blackness’ and its appropriateness in the workplace, dictating rules of self-presentation. Again, research finds support for characteristics that signal ethnicity, such as hairstyle, name, and dialect, causing individuals to be judged more harshly in workplace situations (e.g., Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004; Cross & Strauss, 1998; Opie & Phillips, 2015). In this way, identity management somewhat mirrors emotional labor in the requirements of display. Emotion regulation refers to the effort that one uses to display the required emotion of the job. First conceptualized by Hochschild (1983) and further refined by Grandey (2000), the two techniques for emotion regulation are surface acting and deep acting. Surface acting is a response-focused technique in which the individual changes his or her emotional expression to match the emotional requirements of the job, even though they do not match his or her true feelings. Surface acting has been shown to cause negative work attitudes and psychological states such as low job satisfaction, burnout, emotional exhaustion, and stress (Diefendorff et al., 2011; Grandey, 2003; Kammeyer-Mueller et al., 2013). Deep acting, however, is an antecedent- focused technique. Here, the individual may change their cognitive appraisal of the situation to produce a less impactful emotional response or focus on other events that may shift his or her 23 mood to the desired state. Deep acting is typically shown to have positive or non-significant relationships to work attitudes and psychological states (Diefendorff et al., 2011; Grandey, 2003; Kammeyer-Mueller et al., 2013). Recent research on emotional regulation suggests that the outcomes extend beyond the work realm, spilling over into the home life and impacting health- related behaviors such as alcohol consumption and sleep quality (Krannitz et al., 2015; Sayre et al., 2019; Wagner et al., 2014). The conceptualization and outcomes of surface acting and deep acting mirror a construct that several theories in the identity management literature mention: authenticity. According to Roberts (2005), “Authenticity refers to the degree of congruence between internal values and external expressions. In other words, it is the extent to which an individual acts in accord with the true self, and it involves owning one's personal experiences, thoughts, emotions, needs, wants, preferences, or beliefs (Harter, 2002).” Cha and colleagues (2019) call emotional labor a “secondary authenticity construct” and explain how surface acting and deep acting are authenticity-related behaviors. Authenticity resembles emotion regulation techniques by reflecting the alignment between internal feelings and external expression (Cha et al., 2019). The research outcomes are also similar- authenticity (like deep acting) leads to positive outcomes like well-being and job meaningfulness (Illies, et al., 2005; Ménard & Brunet, 2011; Schlegel et al., 2009) while inauthenticity (like surface acting) leads to negative outcomes like stress, emotional exhaustion, and reduced work engagement (Hewlin, 2009; Phillips et al., 2016; Reis et al., 2016). In defining surface acting and deep acting, Hochschild (1983) used cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957) to suggest that incongruence due to emotional labor would create dissonance within the individual. The authenticity research also suggests that behavior that contradicts one’s core identity creates internal conflict (Swann et al., 1989). There are three main differences 24 between the authenticity construct and the emotion regulation strategies. The first difference is that surface acting and deep acting are actions, whereas authenticity reflects the experience resulting from evaluating actions. Surface acting and deep acting are also conceptualized as actions pertaining specifically to altering emotion; authenticity refers to the evaluation of more than just emotion-based actions, such as one’s experiences, beliefs, values, or identity expression. The third difference is that authenticity is typically conceptualized as a continuum (from authentic to inauthentic) in the literature, rather than two distinct constructs like surface acting and deep acting. Lastly, Grandey and Gabriel (2015) describe emotion performance. Emotion performance is the observable display of emotion that is either congruent or incongruent (called emotional deviance) with the emotional requirements of the job (Bono & Vey, 2007; Rafaeli & Sutton, 1987). The research on emotion performance uses trained coders to judge if physical cues of emotion (such as smiling or eye contact) align with the display requirements. This research mostly focuses on the perception of the observer, rather than the experience of the employee doing the emotional performance. Similarly, the identity management literature has centered the “success” of strategies in the workplace, which are based on the judgements of the observer that the person managing their identity has displayed an “appropriate” identity to receive “appropriate” treatment. For example, Ali, Lyons, and Ryan (2017) tested the effectiveness of identity management strategies for ex-offenders in the job interview setting and found that the strategy used (excuse, justification, or apology) signaled remorse, which informed judgements of anticipated workplace deviance (Ali, Lyons, & Ryan, 2017). The interviewee’s performance was important for determining alignment with the perceived identity requirements. Another study more overtly investigated how Black and White participants perceived a Black employee identity 25 shifting in the workplace. McCluney and colleagues (2019) found that white participants perceived the Black employee more positively and as more professional when they changed their name to be more Eurocentric, changed their hairstyle, or avoided using slang in the workplace. Interestingly, Black participants perceived the employee to be less professional, with qualitative responses suggesting that changing one’s identity to fit in is not perceived as the way to be successful, but that being authentic is the way to be successful. Like emotion performance, identity management is about how one displays oneself outwardly to others. Noting the theoretical and empirical overlap between emotional labor and identity management, I propose two new constructs that integrate emotional labor and identity management: surface switching and deep switching. There are three main integration points to conceptualize surface switching and deep switching. The first integration is the expansion of surface acting and deep acting to include the evaluation of internal perceptions of identity expression. Surface acting uses comparison points such as if the person is hiding or displaying his or her true feelings and surface switching would have parallel comparison points such as if the person is hiding or displaying his or her true self. Deep acting evaluates a person’s effort to feel an emotion they are required to feel, and deep switching has a parallel evaluation that assess a person’s effort to try to be the person they are required to be for the job. The benefit to including an evaluation of the internal self is that surface and deep switching encompass additional character defining constructs that would influence behavior or perceptions of behavior such as values or patterns of cognition. The second point of integration involves the target of the behavior. Emotional regulation was originally conceptualized to describe outward facing interactions that are a series of one- time (or relatively infrequent) interfaces with new people within service industry jobs 26 (Hochschild, 1989; Grandey & Gabrielle, 2015). More recently, emotional labor literature has explored surface acting and deep acting in other contexts including towards coworkers, leaders, and intimate partners (Diefendorff et al. 2010; Ozcelik, 2013; Tschan et al. 2005) but researchers question whether the constructs can retain its uniqueness in these contexts (Grandey & Gabrielle, 2015; Shoshan & Venz, 2021). Much of identity management research has made assumptions about more long-term, consistent behaviors in the workplace. It is predicated on the premise of a professional image that is constantly constructed based on feedback in the environment (Roberts, 2005). Surface switching and deep switching also possesses the assumption that the behavior is towards familiar others in the workplace. The implications of interactions with familiar others are that there are histories of interactions (i.e., patterns of behavior) and expectations of identity display beyond in-role expectations. There are also now consequences- both work and intrapersonal- for inconsistent behavior over time which creates pressure to maintain a particular image. The third point of integration is the separation between the two types of behavior (i.e., behavior that is aligned versus behavior that is misaligned with internal states). The identity management literature has separated identity management into different strategies based on the type of outward behavior, but those strategies have not been separated based on the alignment between how one feels internally and behaves externally. All identity management strategies could potentially be divided based on internal and external alignment and it would likely predict different outcomes for the individual compared to the way it is currently separated by the type of outward behavior. Surface and deep shifting are both actions focused on the alignment/misalignment of internal and external states like surface and deep acting. 27 There are several ways that the identity shifting and emotional labor constructs overlap, such that the integration into surface and deep shifting possess aspects of both. The momentary, episodic nature that both emotion regulation and identity shifting have is an important characteristic. Both have been found to occur on an event-like basis several times throughout one day (Dickens & Chavez, 2018; Gabriel & Diefendorff, 2015; Scott & Barnes, 2011) and can vary based on context (Bell, 1990; Bhave & Glomb, 2016; Wilk & Moynihan, 2005). Although not specifically stated this way, surface acting and deep acting can have a “switch” like mechanism where one is surface acting to a customer and then expressing their true emotion to coworkers (Grandey, Foo, Broth, & Goodwin, 2012). Surface shifting and deep shifting maintain the transitional mechanism present in identity shifting and the emotion regulation techniques. Identity Composition and Identity Shifting Behavior In my conceptual model, I propose that identity integration will lead to specific identity shifting behaviors. When an individual has high identity integration between his or her racial identity and professional identity, the cohesive and overlapping nature of the identities will make it more probable for an individual to align their internal perception of their identity to outward expressions of identity (or deep shift) in an identity management interaction because the identities are harmonious and share meaning. On the contrary, an individual with low identity integration will be less likely to adjust their internal self to fit the situation because the identities are conflicting and separate in meaning, eliciting a feigned identity expression that does not align with their racial identity (or surface shift). For example, a Black woman with high identity integration may be more inclined to deep shift during an interaction that requires her to be overly social at work to avoid stereotypes of aggression if being social is also a meaningful part of her Black identity. A Black woman with low identity integration may be more inclined to surface 28 shift overly social behavior at work if the type of socializing she must do to avoid stereotypes conflicts with her Black identity. I hypothesize that: H1a: Identity integration will be negatively related to surface switching behaviors. H1b: Identity integration will be positively related to deep switching behaviors. Job Characteristics Identity shifting as a proactive form of identity management is a repeated process of identity negotiation that has been shown to occur daily for some populations (i.e., Black women, Bell, 1990; Dickens et al, 2018). The repeated need to negotiate one’s identity likely predicts identity shifting behaviors and the outcomes of those behaviors. Indeed, research suggests that when individuals are racially dissimilar from a homogenous workgroup, they are more likely to regulate their emotions (Kim, Bhave, & Glomb, 2013), signifying that the individual may need to continually negotiate their identity. The frequency and duration of interacting with others have been used as factors that define emotional labor, measure emotional labor, and determine the outcomes of emotional labor. Hochschild (1983) and Ashforth and Humphrey (1993) considered the frequency and duration of surface acting and deep acting as dimensions of emotional labor. These factors were considered variations in role characteristics, which then became important to measure for understanding emotion regulation. In the first developed emotional labor scale, Brotheridge and Lee (2003) used frequency, duration, intensity, and variation of interactions of expressing emotions as subscales for emotional labor alongside surface acting and deep acting. However, as Grandey (2000) pointed out, the conceptualization of the frequency and duration of emotional labor as a measure of emotional labor is circular logic. More recent research uses the frequency or duration of interactions with others as role demands or situational characteristics that influence surface acting and deep acting or the 29 outcomes of those behaviors. Chou and colleagues (2012) found that the frequency of interacting with difficult patients was directly related to both surface acting itself and emotional exhaustion (Chou et al., 2012). Zammuer and colleagues (2003) found that the duration of listening to patients was directly related to surface and deep acting. Further, they found that the frequency of patient interactions related to cynicism (called depersonalization for human services workers; Maslach & Jackson, 1981) and the duration of patient interactions related to the professional efficacy (called work realization for the Italian version for human services workers) (Zammuer, et al., 2003). Brotheridge and Grandey (2002) also found that the frequency and duration of interactions with others was positively related to surface acting and deep acting. Contrary to the presented research, Diefendorff and colleagues (2005) did not find that frequency or duration were predictors of surface acting, but duration was a significant predictor of deep acting. I adopt the view of the majority of research and apply it to identity shifting behaviors. I would expect that individuals that are more frequently interacting with others or interacting for longer times (particularly interacting with others of the dominant culture) will need to engage in more surface switching and/or deep switching. Additionally, I would expect more interactions or longer interactions to relate to the burnout outcome (but not the well-being outcome, given a lack of supporting research). Burnout is discussed more thoroughly in the next section. I hypothesize: H2a: Higher frequencies of interacting with others will be positively related to surface shifting. H2b: Longer durations of interacting with others will be positively related to surface shifting. H2c: Higher frequencies of interacting with others will be positively related to deep shifting. 30 H2d: Longer durations of interacting with others will be positively related to deep shifting. H2e: Higher frequencies of interacting with others will be positively related to burnout (positively related to emotional exhaustion, positively related to cynicism, negatively related to professional efficacy). H2f: Longer durations of interacting with others will be positively related to burnout (positively related to emotional exhaustion, positively related to cynicism, negatively related to professional efficacy). Identity Shifting and Burnout Burnout is commonly characterized as physical and/or emotional exhaustion, negative work attitudes, and negative attitudes towards others or one’s self (Demerouti, Mostert, & Bakker, 2010; Maslach & Jackson, 1981). It is a popularly studied outcome of emotional labor because it was first proposed as a symptom of working in human services, though later research confirmed the validity of the construct across occupations (Baker, Demerouti, & Schaufelo, 2002; Leiter, & Schaufeli, 1996). The subfactors of burnout vary by the measurement of choice. Here, I use the Maslach Burnout Inventory- General Survey (MBI-GS; Schaufeli et al., 1996), with the subfactors emotional exhaustion, cynicism, and professional efficacy. Emotional exhaustion refers to the feeling of being drained of emotional resources (Schutte, et al., 2000). Cynicism refers to a negative, apathetic, or distant attitude toward one’s work (Schutte, et al., 2000). Professional efficacy refers to an individual’s anticipated effectiveness at work (Schutte, et al., 2000). High emotional exhaustion, high cynicism, and low professional efficacy reflect a high degree of burnout. Emotional exhaustion and cynicism tend to be highly correlated (rc = 64) but only moderately correlated with professional efficacy (rcs = -.33 for emotional exhaustion 31 and -.36 for cynicism; Lee & Ashforth, 1996), causing some to consider emotional exhaustion and cynicism to be the core dimensions of burnout (Green, Walkey, & Taylor, 1991). There is also likely a difference in the relationship between subscales due to the psychometric limitations; both emotion exhaustion and cynicism have all negatively worded items whereas profession efficacy has all positively worded items, which can result in artificial factor solutions (Demerouti et al., 2010). Though some researchers have chosen not to include professional efficacy in their studies because of these reasons, (i.e., Demerouti et al 2010), others have confirmed that a three factor structure is better than a two factor structure (Lee & Ashforth, 1990; Makikangas, et al., 2011). As previously described, surface acting has been related to burnout while deep acting tends to not be associated with burnout (Chou, Hecker, & Martin, 2012; Diefendorff, et al., 2011; Grandey, 2003; Kammeyer-Mueller, et al., 2013; Zammuer et al., 2003). The identity management literature has also been associated with burnout. Actively managing one’s image, including avoiding stereotypes, presenting a false image, or working to fit in takes affective, cognitive, and emotional resources that can be easily depleted with continuous circumstances (Demerouti et al., 2001; Walton et al., 2015). For example, creating ‘facades of conformity’ or self-images that hide value misalignment and feign conformity is highly related to emotional exhaustion (Hewlin, 2009). However, the outcomes of identity management may not be entirely negative. Dickens and Chavez (2018) report that the benefits of identity shifting are increased personal and professional relationships and career success. In fact, the most commonly reported positive outcome of identity switching is perceived career success (Dickens & Chavez, 2018). Individuals that identity shift may receive social resources, affective boosts, boosts in self-efficacy, or other 32 positive stimulation which would in turn affect perceptions of professional efficacy. Research supports professional efficacy as developing separately from emotional exhaustion and cynicism, which tend to be highly associated with each other (Lee & Ashforth, 1990; Demerouti et al., 2003; Cordes & Dougherty, 1993). Early research on the correlates of the three dimensions of burnout found that professional efficacy (then personal accomplishment which was specific to the human services field) had strong associations with friends at work and participation at work as resources that fulfilled relatedness or competence needs (Demerouti et al., 2001; Lee & Ashforth, 1996). Thus, identity shifting may have unique relationships with the subfactors of burnout. First, given the evidence that surface acting but not deep acting is related to burnout, I only posit relationships between surface shifting and burnout. Secondly, I expect that surface shifting will be positively related to emotional exhaustion, cynicism, and professional efficacy which differs from normal indications of burnout (normal indicators would be positive associations with emotional exhaustion and cynicism but negative associations with professional efficacy). I hypothesize that: H3a: Surface shifting will be positively related to emotional exhaustion. H3b: Surface shifting will be positively related to cynicism. H3c: Surface shifting will be positively related to professional efficacy. Shifting and Authenticity The previously reviewed literature evidenced parallels between the outcomes of surface acting and deep acting with the outcomes of authenticity presented in the identity management literature. The major difference between the constructs is that surface acting and deep acting are behaviors whereas authenticity is an experiential state that results from specific behaviors. I 33 propose that authenticity would be the explanatory mechanism for the outcomes of surface switching and deep switching. Drawing from the emotion regulation and identity shifting literatures, I hypothesize: H3d: Surface shifting will be negatively related to authenticity H4: Deep shifting will be positively related to authenticity. Authenticity and Individual Outcomes Authenticity has been studied in association with well-being since its very conception in ancient philosophy, art, and science (Kernis & Goldman, 2006). Authenticity has been connected to well-being operationalized in several different ways: as psychological health (e.g., Emmerich & Rigotti, 2017; Robinson et al., 2012; Wood et al., 2008), measures of satisfaction (e.g., Ménard & Brunet, 2011), or the fulfillment of needs, particularly through the Self-Determination Theory (SDT, Deci & Ryan, 2000; e.g., Metin et al., 2016; Reis, Trullen, & Story, 2016). Authenticity in the work context has also been related to well-being operationalized in different ways. In addition to the previous methods, well-being has been operationalized as positive work outcomes like work engagement or performance (Leroy, Anseel, Dimitrova, & Sels, 2013; Metin et al., 2016; Reis et al., 2016) or job satisfaction (e.g., van den Bosch & Taris, 2014). Throughout the various operationalizations, authenticity is consistently and reliably related to well-being. Inauthenticity is consistently found to be related to aspects of burnout, particularly emotional exhaustion (Hewlin, 2009; Phillips et al., 2016). Burnout is indicated by a depletion of emotional, cognitive, or physical resources (Hobfoll, 1989; Demerouti et al., 2001; Xanthopoulou & Meier, 2014). Being inauthentic is one way that an individual can deplete these resources. McCluney and colleagues (2019) found that Black employees that reported fit with their organization were also more likely to burn out. This surprising result may be explained by 34 the fact that these same employees reported downplaying their racial identity and promoting their shared interests with majority group members to fit in, which the authors suspected led to the higher likelihood of burnout. Several qualitative studies have also shown that inauthenticity is exhausting for participants (Bell & Nkomo, 2001). Given this research, I hypothesize: H5a: Authenticity will be positively related to well-being. H5b: Authenticity will be negatively related to burnout. Testing the Model In order to study the proposed relationships in the conceptual model of intrapersonal consequences of identity shifting, I used a mixed methods sequential explanatory research design. Mixed methods approaches are thought to be especially useful for applied fields because of the additional contextual variables and insights about unique experiences obtained that cannot be fully covered by quantitative data alone (Thorne, 2020). In Phase I of the research, I use a cross-sectional survey of Black employees to collect quantitative information about the relationship of the proposed constructs in the conceptual model. The results of Phase I were used to construct a semi-structured interview protocol for Phase II, with the purpose of providing a more in-depth perspective of participant experiences. One benefit of this research design was the possibility to expound upon the statistical relationships determined in the quantitative phase (Creswell 2003; Ivankova et al., 2006), which provided additional theoretical contributions beyond the proposed model. Another benefit is that this approach offers explanations for the quantitative results beyond what can be gathered from statistics (Ivankova et al., 2006; Morse, 1991). The discussion section combines the results of Phase I and Phase II and reviews the limitations, implications, and future directions of the research. 35 Chapter 4: Phase I Methodology Participants Previous research on identity shifting has centered Black women for several reasons. In older research (in the 90s and early 2000s), Black women were just beginning to reach professional career success for the first time in the U.S. given the historical context of segregation and women’s shifting place in the workforce. Black women’s work experience tended to be overlooked or under researched as they fell into the categories of women in the workplace or Black people in the workplace (Bell, 1990). As intersectional theories entered the organizational sciences, Black women were centered for their unique experiences of gender and race at work (e.g., Purdie Vaughns & Eibach, 2008; Rosette et al., 2016; Rosette et al., 2018). The present study is primarily interested in comparing one’s racial identity to one’s professional identity given the culture-related context of race. However, intersectionality research would suggest that individuals with dual minority identities experience the unique combination of those identities, making them hard to separate (i.e., Rosette et al., 2018). In other words, Black women’s experiences in the workplace are simultaneously racialized and gendered, whereas Black men’s experiences may only be racialized. Furthermore, unpublished studies suggest that women of color must do more identity management than their men of color colleagues to receive social support (Bhattacharyya et al., 2019). Therefore, the present study uses self-identified Black employees but recruited both men and women, aiming to acknowledge any salient differences in experiences. Gender was correlated with many variables of interest in Phase I, particularly measures related to identity and competence in the workplace but not with the identity shifting measures. In Phase II, participants identified differing experiences between Black men and Black women in the workplace, but there were not any specific differences 36 amongst identity shifting experiences. Gender serves as a control variable during the Phase I analyses and is not a focal point for Phase II. Participants for Phase I were recruited in two waves. In the first wave, I recruited Black employees using a snowball method within my own professional network. I publicized the study on social networks (Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, Twitter) and personally invited people in my network to participant or to share with others in their network via email, text messages or direct messages on social media. On social media sites I reached out to Black professional groups such as Black alumni associations and Historically Black College or University (HBCU) community groups. I also recruited through listservs of Black organizations and professional group chats that were willing to share the study details. The recruitment link directed participants to a screening survey, which determined which participants would be contacted at a later date. The screener determined if participants were 18 years or older, self-identify as Black/African American, and have been employed with an organization for at least 6 months within the past year1. Part-time employees and self-employed entrepreneurs were excluded from the sample. Participants were given a choice of compensation: $10 Amazon gift card, $10 donated on the participant’s behalf to organizations fighting for racial equity, or to donate their time. Data collection was moving too slowly recruiting with the snowball sample. Therefore, the second wave of data collection was done using a Qualtrics panel. The requirements for participants were the same: 18 years or older, self-identify as Black/African American, and have been employed with an organization for at least 6 months within the past year. It was requested that Qualtrics purposely sampled for an even percentage of genders (preference for half males 1 Data collection occurred during the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States. The requirement of employment was relaxed to account for employees that may have been laid off or otherwise displaced due to the pandemic. 37 and half females with a 5% tolerance for other genders) and an even spread of age ranges. The Qualtrics participants had a screener at the beginning of the survey and were dismissed if they did not meet the qualifications. Compensation was determined by Qualtrics and their additional partners. After cleaning the data there were 166 collected from the network approach and 118 from the Qualtrics panel for a total sample of 284 participants. There were not statistically significant differences between the groups in any of the hypothesis-testing analyses, so they are treated as one sample from here. The average age of participants was 39.28 (SD = 11.92) and 61.6% self- identified as female or women. Although all participants self-identified as Black/African American, they were allowed to choose other races or further explain how they identified, resulting in 4.6% of participants identifying as multi-racial. Most participants worked for private, for-profit companies (62.4%) with the average company size ranging between 1,000 and 9,999 employees. Eighty-two percent had job positions that were mid-level managers or below. Procedure Qualified participants received an email invitation to participate in an online survey using the Qualtrics survey platform. The survey began with some additional screening variables (Captcha, human entry questions) and the informed consent form (see Appendix A). The survey then proceeded as follows: the outcome variables (burnout, well-being, authenticity), the switching behaviors (surface shifting, deep shifting behaviors), identity-related questions (identity integration, identity inventory), and demographics, including job characteristics (frequency and duration of interacting with others). Participants were either able to select if they would be willing to do a follow-up interview (first wave) or email the researcher if they were interested in participating in the follow-up interview (second wave). 38 Measures All measures are presented in Appendix B and are reviewed here. Scale alphas and correlations are also found in Table 1. Burnout As described previously, I used the 16- item Maslach Burnout Inventory- General Survey by Maslach and colleagues (Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter, 1996). There are 5 items for exhaustion (e.g., I feel used up at the end of the workday;  = .93), 5 items for cynicism (e.g., I have become less enthusiastic about my work;  = .84), and 6 items for professional efficacy (e.g., In my opinion, I am good at my job;  = .86). Each subscale was computed separately; it is not appropriate to add the three scale scores for a total burnout score (Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter, 1996). Well-Being I sought to use a combination of well-being measure approaches to anticipate the effect of COVID-19 related noise on well-being. First, I used the psychological wellness perspective similar to Robinson and colleagues (2012) with the Warwick-Edinburgh Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS; Tennant, et al., 2007). This 14-item scale ( = .92) measures overall positive mental well-being with items such as “I’ve been feeling optimistic about the future” on a scale from 1- None of the time to 5- All of the time. Next, I asked about overall job satisfaction with the one item “Overall, I am satisfied with my job”. A meta-analysis of one item job satisfaction measures shows that one item measures sufficiently assess job attitudes (Wanous et al., 1997), as evidenced by several studies (i.e., van den Bosch & Taris, 2014; Brewer, 2005). Finally, I used an SDT approach to measure well-being with the Work-related Basic Needs Satisfaction Scale (van den Broeck, et al., 2010). The 18-item scale ( = .87) contains subscales that correlate to 39 SDT: autonomy (‘In my job I feel free to do things I do not want to do’;  = .76), competence (‘I feel confident at my job’;  = .83), and relatedness (‘At work, I feel a part of a group’;  = .84). Authenticity In order to capture authenticity as it relates to identity shifting in the workplace, I used the 12-item (=.88) Individual Authenticity Measure at Work scale (IAM Work; van den Bosch & Taris, 2014). The IAM Work scale measures authenticity contextualized specifically to the work environment using the same tripartite construct of authenticity used in other measures of authenticity (e.g., Wood, et al., 2008): authentic living, self-alienation, and accepting external influence. In the development of the scale, van den Bosch and Taris (2014) found that the three factor structure and the one factor structure models fit exactly the same and suggested that future research interested in “a global indication of the general experience of authenticity at work” use the total score of the IAM Work Scale rather than the three subscales. This study uses the total score to measure the general experience of authenticity at work. Identity Shifting Surface shifting and deep shifting are proposed constructs that parallel the surface acting and deep acting constructs. I used an adapted version of Diefendorff and colleagues (2005) Emotional Labor Strategy Items for an identity shifting scale made up of seven surface shifting items ( = .92) and four deep shifting items ( = .77). The scale was first adapted by Dieffendorff and colleagues from Brotheridge and Lee (2003) as well as other common emotional labor scales. I then adapted it further to specifically refer to one’s professional identity as the focal point. For example, the item “I show feelings to customers that are different from what I feel inside” was adapted to “I show a professional identity to others at work that is different from who I feel I am inside”. Diefendorff and colleagues (2005) included a third 40 measure to differentiate emotional labor from the expression of naturally felt emotions. Their results showed that the expression of naturally felt emotions is distinct from surface acting and deep acting. Although that is an important finding, the focus of this study is on identity shifting so the third construct did not have a parallel to warrant its inclusion in the present study. Cha and colleagues (2019) document a construct related to authentic identity expression called identity manifestation. Identity manifestation “refers to openly displaying or revealing one’s devalued social identities (Madera et al., 2012), such as by disclosing a concealable or “invisible” stigma (e.g., sexuality, pregnancy, and illness), comporting oneself and dressing in ways that draw attention to a devalued social identity, engaging in discussions about the identity, or affirming and enhancing the positive distinctiveness of the identity at work.” (p. 645, Cha, et al., 2019). In other words, identity manifestation is the expression of behavior that aligns with one’s stigmatized identity. Contrarily, identity suppression is the purposeful reduction of identity related behaviors, which is a form of identity management (Cha et al., 2019; Madera, et al., 2012). Madera, King, and Hebl (2012) developed 10 items to measure manifestation (“I use the language, vernacular, or speech style of this identity at work”) and 10 items to measure suppression (“I conceal or camouflage signs of this identity in my workspace”). I altered the directions such that participants did not choose the social identity most important to them, but were directed to think about their racial identity (manifestation  = .88; suppression  = .90). Given that this construct is so closely tied to identity shifting, I used it in exploratory analyses to learn more about the specific identity shifting behaviors participants engaged in. Identity Integration To measure identity integration, I use an adapted version of the eight-item Bicultural Identity Integration Scale (BII; Benet-Martinez & Haritatos, 2005; Haritatos & Benet-Martinez, 41 2002). Following common practice for using this scale (e.g., Cheng, Sanchez-Burks, et al., 2008; Darling et al., 2008; Henderson et al., 2018), I adapted the questions to reflect the two identities I wanted to know about: racial/ethnic identity and professional identity. Measures of identity integration tend to have sufficient reliability across adaptations (e.g.,  = .70, Cheng, Sanchez- Burks, et al., 2008;  = .88, Henderson et al., 2018), including a satisfactory reliability in this adaptation ( = .82). Though identity integration captures the relationship between two identities, it does not provide substantial information about the way that a person views the identities. Previous research has established different dimensions of the Black / African American identity that have proven to be important determinants of well-being (Jackson, 2011; Willis, & Neblett, 2020). Given this research, I included the Multidimensional Model of Racial Identity (MMRI; Sellers, Shelton, Rowley & Chavous, 1998) as an additional lens to consider the identity-related relationships through in the exploratory analyses. The MMRI includes seven subscales but only four were deemed related in the present study: centrality- referring to the extent to which a person defines him or herself by their racial identity ( = .79); private regard- referring to the extent to which a person feels positively or negatively about being Black ( = .86); public regard- referring to the extent to which a person feels others perceive Black people as positive or negative ( = .80); and assimilation- referring to the extent to which a person (in this case a Black person) feels they should strive to integrate into the mainstream ( = .82). Frequency and Duration of Interacting With Others Within the demographic measures, I used adapted versions of Diefendorff and colleagues’ (2005) measures of frequency of interactions and duration of interactions. The questions were altered to reflect how frequently and how long participants interact with others 42 (rather than patients specifically). There were only two questions for frequency ( = .67) and two questions for duration ( = .62), leading to generally low reliabilities. COVID-19 Controls During the time of data collection, the entire world was facing several challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Many people in the United States where data collection occurred were facing extreme changes to their daily lives including changes in employment (e.g., layoffs, furloughs, working from home, change in work demands), health, travel, and subsequent emotional challenges. In order to account for the effect of the pandemic on measures of interest (particularly the outcomes of well-being and burnout), I included control measures related to the pandemic. I used the 10-item ( = .81) Perceived Stress Scale Cohen et al., 1983; Cohen & Williamson, 1988) to measure the psychological impact of the pandemic on participants. The instructions were adapted from “in the past month”, to “since the pandemic began” as the time period of reference. Demographics I asked typical participant demographic questions at the end of the survey, including gender, age, and race. I also inquired about participants’ current employment by asking about employment type (private for-profit, private not-for-profit, or government agency), the level of their job position, and the demographics of their place of work. The questions about their place of work asked about the size of their organization (ranging from 1- Less than 15 employees to 6- More than 50,000 employees), the racial composition of the leaders of their organization, the racial composition of the location where they worked, and the racial composition of their workgroup (the racial composition questions were on a scale from 1- All or Mostly White to 5- All or mostly non-White). These questions are used to describe the participant population and, 43 given the potential for variation in identity switching due to the demographics of the audience, as potential control variables. 44 Chapter 5: Phase I Results Initial Analyses Before analyzing the hypotheses, I cleaned the data and did preliminary analyses to prepare the data for hypothesis testing. The data cleaning began during the data collection process. I used the required open-ended questions as the main indicator of unreliable participants; those that gave bogus or incoherent answers were eliminated from the sample. These entries were replaced during the data collection process when possible. I merged the two different waves of data into one dataset and eliminated unnecessary variables. The data was further evaluated for careless responding using activity response times, but no participants were eliminated from this analysis as they all spent at least an appropriate amount of time on the survey. Cleaning continued as necessary throughout the analyses; one participant was eliminated because they did not indicate they were Black/African Americans (did so in the screener but not in the demographics section), one person was eliminated because their qualitative answer suggested they were self-employed, and twenty-three more participants were eliminated for bogus answers during the coding of the open items. The final sample includes 284 participants. Next, I reverse-coded the necessary items, constructed composite scores, and assessed the reliability of each scale. All scales had acceptable reliability measurements except for the aforementioned low reliabilities on the frequency and duration measurements which were likely due to only have two items in each measurement. The means, standard deviations, bivariate correlations, and reliabilities are reported in Table 1. I used the bivariate correlations to identify significant relationships between the demographic variables and the independent and dependent variables in each hypothesis. The relationships determined which demographic variables that I use for controls in each hypothesis. 45 The surface shifting and deep shifting measures were the only measures that were adapted to be conceptually different than the original scales. Before performing any analyses, I wanted to ensure that the measures reflected a two factor structure similar to surface acting and deep acting. I completed a confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) to confirm that a two-factor model was a sufficiently fitting model. The latent variables were allowed to freely correlate and each item was only allowed to load on only one factor. The fit indices are presented in Table 2. The model fit was satisfactory in each index. The modification indices suggested that allowing two sets of items’ error residuals to correlate would improve model fit. Both sets of items- (set 1: item 2 and item 7; set 2: item 3 and item 5) had similar language usage (e.g., ‘I fake a professional identity’ in both items 2 and 7), implying that there was a secondary influence that justified allowing the modifications. Model 2 is also in Table 2, showing a moderately better fit than Model 1 in all fit indices. The good fit provided confidence that the surface shifting and deep shifting scales were independent but related, functioning similar to the surface acting and deep acting scales. Hypotheses Testing Bivariate correlations were used to determine the relationship between the proposed constructs and possible covariates. I used multiple regression analysis to determine if the hypothesized variables of interest were significantly related to the hypothesized outcomes, accounting for the covariates. When covariates made the difference between a significant and non-significant result, it is noted in the text. Each hypothesis has an accompanying table (see Tables 3–19). 46 While I tested individual regressions for each hypothesis, I also report the overall model fit in the exploratory analyses. Certain paths in the model are also explored based on the results of the hypothesis testing. Hypotheses H1a and H1b H1a and H1b made predictions about the relationship between identity integration and identity shifting behaviors. H1a hypothesized there would be a negative relationship between identity integration and surface shifting behaviors. Gender, job position level, frequency, duration, and the COVID perceived stress scale were entered into the model as controls based on bivariate correlations between those variables, identity integration, and surface shifting. The analysis provided support for the hypothesis, showing that identity integration significantly and negatively predicts surface shifting behaviors R2 = .40, F(6, 139.85) = 30.60,  = -.48 p < .001 (see Table 3). H1b conversely hypothesized there would be a positive relationship between identity integration and deep shifting behaviors. The same covariates were entered into the model. A significant regression was found, but in the opposite direction of what was hypothesized: R2 = .06, F(6, 13.08) = 3.10,  = -.24 p < .001 (see Table 4). Because identity integration significantly and negatively predicts deep shifting behavior, this hypothesis was not supported. Hypotheses H2a-f H2 hypothesized the relationship between job characteristics and identity shifting behaviors and between job characteristics and intrapersonal outcomes. The job characteristics of frequency of interacting with others at work and the duration of interaction with others at work are considered independently with separate hypotheses. H2a hypothesized a positive relationship between frequency of interacting with others and surface shifting, with the regression model 47 controlling for duration of interacting with others, identity integration, job position, the racial composition of the workplace, and the perceived stress scale. H2a was not supported, showing a non-significant model: R2 = .40, F(6, 138.17) = 30.11,  = -.09, p =.11 (see Table 5). H2b hypothesized a positive relationship between duration of interacting with others and surface shifting. The covariates for H2b were frequency of interacting with others, identity integration, job position, racial composition of the workplace, racial composition of leaders, and the perceived stress scale. H2b was also not supported: R2 = .40, F(7, 138.88) = 25.94,  = -.01, p =.84 (see Table 6). H2c and H2d hypothesized the relationship between job characteristics and deep shifting. H2c predicted a positive relationship between frequency and deep shifting and the model used the same covariates as H2a. The regression was not significant so H2c was not supported: R2 = .06, F(6, 12.75) = 2.99,  = -.00 p =.98 (see Table 7). H2d hypothesized a positive relationship between duration and deep shifting using the same covariates as H2b. H2d was supported with a significant a positive regression, R2 = .062, F(7, 12.77) = 2.56,  = .15, p <.05 (see Table 8). H2e and H2f hypothesized the relationship between job characteristics and burnout. Because the Maslach Burnout Inventory measures each subcategory of burnout separately, three regressions were run for H2e and for H2f to test the hypotheses. H2e predicted that frequency would be positively related to burnout, which breaks out into positive relations to emotional exhaustion, positive relations to cynicism, and negative relations to professional efficacy. All three regressions used the covariates duration, identity integration, job position, racial composition of the workplace, the perceived stress scale, and controls for the other aspects of burnout. Emotional exhaustion also controlled for the racial composition of leaders. Table 9 features the three regression analyses for each subcategory of burnout separately. The model 48 showed that frequency has no significant relationship with burnout, as none of the subcategories were significant; emotion exhaustion: R2 = .54, F(9, 418.02) = 35.05,  = -.05 p = .313; cynicism: R2 = .54, F(8, 346.28) = 39.90,  = .00, p = .97; and professional efficacy: R2 = .19, F(8, 85.86) = 7.69,  = .12 p = .08. H2f predicted that duration would be positively related to burnout. The covariates in the model were frequency, identity integration, job position, racial composition of the workplace, racial composition of leaders, the perceived stress scale, and the other subcategories of burnout. See Table 10 for all three regressions models. The regression model for duration and emotional exhaustion was marginally significant, R2 = .54, F(9, 418.02) = 35.05,  = .10 p = .06. When the model was performed without the covariates, it was not significant, R2 = .00, F(1, 1.56) = .56,  = -.08 p = .45, suggesting no support for the predicted relationship between duration and emotional exhaustion. For duration and cynicism, the model showed support for a significant negative relationship, R2 = .54, F(9, 347.83) = 35.69,  = -.14 p < .01, which is in the opposite direction than predicted. Finally, the model for duration and professional efficacy was marginally significant, R2 = .189, F(9, 87.60) = 6.98,  = .13 p = .06. Without the covariates, the model is significant, R2 = .054, F(1, 25.184) = 16.087,  = .316 p < .001. I interpret this result as support for a significant relationship between duration and professional efficacy, though again it is in the opposite direction than predicted. Overall, the models showed that duration is significantly related to cynicism and to professional efficacy but in opposite ways than hypothesized such that the longer the duration of interactions with others at work, the lower the cynicism and the higher the professional efficacy. Hypotheses H3a-c Hypotheses H3a-c hypothesized the relationships between surface shifting and the subcategories of burnout. Rather than predicting relationships that reflect the normal patterns of 49 burnout where emotional exhaustion and cynicism are in one direction and professional efficacy are in another direction, I hypothesized that all three subcategories would be positively related to surface shifting. Therefore, each of the results tables are presented separately. Each of the three regression models used frequency, duration, identity integration, job position, racial composition of the workplace, the perceived stress scale, and the other aspects of burnout as control variables. The racial composition of leaders was also controlled for in the model for emotional exhaustion. H3a was supported with a significant regression model between surface shifting and emotional exhaustion, R2 = .56, F(11, 432.96) = 30.77,  = .20 p < .005 (see Table 11). There was no support for H3b, which had a non-significant relationship between surface shifting and cynicism, R2 = .55, F(10, 349.51) = 32.34,  = .06 p = .307 (see Table 12). Finally, although there was a significant relationship between surface shifting and professional efficacy, it was in the opposite direction than predicted, R2 = .29, F(10, 327.11) = 11.11,  = -.32 p < .001 (see Table 13), meaning H3c was not supported. Hypotheses H3d and H4 H3d and H4 hypothesize the relationship between the shifting behaviors and authenticity. These hypotheses parallel the relationships between emotional labor strategies and authenticity that have previously been seen in the literature. I used identity integration, frequency, duration, job position, the perceived stress scale, gender, and the other shifting variable as covariates for both. H3d predicts that surface shifting will be negatively related to authenticity. Results found a significant negative relationship as expected, R2 = .69, F(8, 256.48) = 75.58,  = -.65 p < .001 (see Table 14). H4 predicts that deep shifting will be positively related to authenticity. This hypothesis was not supported, showing a non-significant positive relationship, R2 = .69, F(8, 256.48) = 75.58,  = .032, p = .52 (see Table 15). 50 Hypotheses H5a and H5b Similar to H3d and H4, H5a and H5b represent conceptual relationships that have previously been identified in the literature although the context and measures differ. In H5a I hypothesized that authenticity is positively related to well-being. The first measure used to test this hypothesis conceptualizes overall mental well-being with the WEMEBS. Identity integration, frequency, duration, surface shifting, deep shifting, job position, gender, and the perceived stress scale were used as covariates in the model. Results showed a significant positive relationship between authenticity and well-being R2 = .28, F(10, 7194.44) = 10.55,  = .29, p < .005 (see Table 16). Next, I tested the hypothesis regressing the model onto the one-item job satisfaction question using the same covariates. Again, there was a significant positive relationship between authenticity and well-being, R2 = .28, F(10, 7194.44) = 10.55,  = .29, p < .005 (see Table 17). Lastly, I tested this hypothesis using an SDT approach with the Work- related Basic Needs Satisfaction Scale. I tested the sum score of the scale and the subscales separately; they are all presented in Table 18. The sum score used the same covariates as listed before, showing a significant positive relationship between authenticity and needs satisfaction, R2 = .54, F(10, 60.90) = 31.74,  = .64 p < .001. The model for competence used the same covariates and found a significant positive relationship, R2 = .40, F(10, 57.92) = 17.44,  = .48 p < .001. To test autonomy, racial composition of senior leaders was added as an additional control variable. The model showed a significant relationship with authenticity, R2 = .39, F(11, 67.17) = 15.29,  = .55 p < .001. Relatedness was tested using the same covariates along with the racial composition of senior leaders and the racial composition of the participants’ direct workgroup. Results found a significant positive relationship between authenticity and relatedness, R2 = .37, F(11, 84.66) = ,  = .47, p < .001. All of the regressions tested showed support for H5a. 51 The last hypothesis predicted authenticity would be negatively related to burnout, such that there would be a negative relationship with emotional exhaustion, negative relationship with cynicism, and positive relationship with professional efficacy (see Table 19 for all three models). The model for emotional exhaustion controlled for frequency, duration, surface shifting, deep shifting, job position, gender, perceived stress scale, racial composition of senior leaders, racial composition of the work location, and the other subcategories of burnout. Results showed a significant negative relationship between authenticity and emotional exhaustion, R2 = .57, F(13, 442.13) = 27.02,  = -.21 p < .01. For cynicism, the same covariates were used except for racial composition of senior leaders, showing a significant negative relationship, R2 = .56, F(12, 357.98) = 28.12  = -.18 p < .05. Finally, the model for professional efficacy used the same covariates as cynicism and showed a significant positive relationship with authenticity, R2 = .37, F(12, 170.83) = 13.00,  = .49, p < .001. As expected from previously established relationships in the literature, hypothesis H5b was supported. Exploratory Analyses Overall Model I tested the overall model using an observed variable path analysis. I used maximum likelihood estimation with listwise deletion in the Mplus 8.0 software program (Muthen & Muthen, 1998-2017) to test model fit. The fit indices indicated a mediocre fit, abiding by some traditional cut offs and falling short of meeting others: 2 = 95.15, p < .001; RMSEA = .137; CFI = .930; TLI = .803; SRMR = .056. The modification indices recommended freeing some constraints in the model of factors for which past research would also suggest are related: surface shifting and deep shifting, exhaustion and cynicism, exhaustion and professional efficacy, and 52 professional efficacy and cynicism. These modifications improved the model fit only slightly: 2 = 76.204, p < .001; RMSEA = .125; CFI = .945; TLI = .836; SRMR = .053. Pathways Within the Model I also analyzed pathways within the overall model to provide more information about how the variables relate to each other. I analyzed pathways that should be significant based on the results of the hypothesis testing. First, I examined the pathway from identity integration to surface shifting to burnout. I used the Mplus 8.0 software program (Muthen & Muthen, 1998- 2017) to test a mediation model with identity integration as the independent variable, surface shifting as the mediator, and the three subcategories of burnout (exhaustion, cynicism, and professional efficacy) as the outcome variables. The indirect effects from identity integration to each of the burnout categories were statistically significant: exhaustion -.31, p < .001, 95% CI (- .41 - .21), cynicism -.30, p < .001, 95% CI (-.39 - .21); and professional efficacy .21, p <.001, 95 CI (.13 - .28). This model also fit well: 2 = 7.67, p = .05; RMSEA = .07; CFI = .99; TLI = .95; SRMR = .03. This pathway suggests that surface shifting mediates the relationship between identity integration and burnout. The mediation and model fit analysis did not include any covariates like the analyses done for the hypotheses. Next, I did a path analysis from identity integration to surface shifting to authenticity to burnout. The model fit moderately well, exceeding some of the traditional cutoffs and falling short of others: 2 = 30.92, p < .001; RMSEA = .11; CFI = .97; TLI = .94; SRMR = .03. The results suggest that there is a relationship from identity integration to burnout through both surface shifting and authenticity. I repeated these analyses using well-being as the outcome variable. The mediation model featured identity integration as the independent variable, surface shifting as the mediator, and the 53 subscales of the Work-Related Needs Satisfaction Scale (relatedness, autonomy, competence) as the outcome variables. The indirect effects from identity integration to the each of the subscales were statistically significant: relatedness .16, p < .001, 95% CI (.13 - .23); autonomy .17, p < .001, 95% CI (.12 - .21), and competence .14, p < .001, 95% CI (.10 - .18). The model fit was moderate 2 = 14.92, p <.005; RMSEA = .12; CFI = .96; TLI = .87; SRMR = .04. These analyses suggest a significant path from identity integration to well-being, and that surface shifting mediates the relationship between identity integration and well-being. Again, I did a path analysis from identity integration to surface shifting to authenticity to well-being. The model fit was moderate: 2 = 35.20 p < .001; RMSEA = .12; CFI = .96; TLI = .92; SRMR = .04. The model fit suggests a causal path from identity integration to surface shifting to authenticity to well-being. I did not do similar paths through deep shifting because of the non-significant relationship between deep shifting and authenticity. Manifestation and Suppression I included the manifestation and suppression measures (Cha et al., 2019) to potentially receive more specific information about identity shifting behaviors compared to the surface shifting and deep shifting measures. The manifestation scale measures if one engages in certain behaviors while the suppression scale measures if one refrains from engaging in those same behaviors on a five-point scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree. I looked at the items of the scales to see which of the behaviors participants most frequently engaged in. In the manifestation scale, participants most frequently selected (i.e., the mode) ‘agree’ to the following behaviors: discuss their racial identity with coworkers, display signs of their racial identity (e.g., cultural objects) at work, celebrate meaningful holidays related to their identity at work, talk about their racial identity with their supervisor, express their racial identity at work, listen to 54 music associated with their racial identity, consume food or drinks associate with their racial identity at work, and that everyone they work with knows how important their racial identity is to them. The mean for each of these items was between 3 (neither agree nor disagree) and 4 (agree). There were only two items in the scale where participants most often selected the neutral response and the mean was less than 3: wear clothes or emblems (e.g., jewelry, pins) that reflect their racial identity at work, and use the language, vernacular, or speech style of their racial identity at work. Interestingly, participants did not answer the suppression scale with the exact opposite answers of the manifestation scale. For most of the items participants most frequently selected ‘disagreed’ to most of the behaviors stated, with a mean between 2 (disagree) and 3 (neither agree nor disagree). However, there were three items where the most frequently selected answer was the neutral response: refrain from talking about racial identity with coworkers, trying not to use the language, vernacular, or speech style of their racial identity at work, and that no one at work knows how important their racial identity is to them. The item about speech is the only one that is both ranked low on the manifestation scale and ranked high on the suppression scale. These more specific behaviors give an idea about how participants may engage in identity shifting at work. The correlations in Table 1 show that the suppression scale is strongly correlated with both surface shifting and deep shifting. In fact, the suppression measure has very similar significance levels and directional relationships as surface shifting with all of the outcome measures including authenticity, the measures of well-being, and the burnout subscales. On the other hand, manifestation is unrelated to surface shifting or deep shifting, which is to be expected given that manifestation is about expressing ones’ racial identity. Manifestation is still positively related to authenticity and all of the well-being measures but unrelated to burnout. 55 These correlations provide some convergent validity suggesting that the suppression measure is similar to or the same as surface shifting, and some divergent validity suggesting that manifestation may be the absence of identity shifting (i.e., naturally expressing one’s identity). Manifestation is also positively related to identity integration while suppression is negatively related to identity integration. This aligns with the hypothesis that individuals with more integrated identities would comfortably present their identity while those less integrated identities would suppress one or more of their identities (through surface shifting). Future studies may conduct more systematic convergent and divergent validity analyses with these measures. Multidimensional Model of Racial Identity The centrality, private regard, public regard, and assimilation subscales of the MMRI are scales that were included because they give more information about a person’s racial identity, which could influence their identity integration and identity shifting behaviors. Centrality and private regard are significantly and positively related to identity integration while public regard and assimilation are non-significantly and negatively related. These correlations suggest that individuals with high racial centrality and positive private regard for their race are more likely to integrate their cultural and professional identities. Interestingly, centrality, private regard, and assimilation are all positively and significantly related to deep shifting. I would not have expected that centrality and private regard would have the same directional relationship with deep shifting given their opposing relationship with identity integration. Further, private regard is the only one of the subscales that is significantly related to surface shifting. There is a negative relationship between private regard and surface shifting, suggesting that the more positive one’s private image is of their race, the less they engage in surface shifting. Research suggests that identity management occurs because of an individual’s perceptions of how others think about 56 them (i.e., anticipated stereotypes or discrimination), so it is unexpected that public regard and assimilation do not have a significant relationship with surface shifting. Future studies that use Black professionals as studies can consider directly comparing the different MMRI scales with more in depth scales or evaluations of the professional identity. Phase I Discussion I used multiple regression to test each of the hypotheses and found mixed support of the overall hypotheses. H1a was supported, showing identity integration is negatively related to surface shifting but H1b was not supported, showing that identity integration is also negatively related to deep shifting (rather than positively related as predicted). An alternative explanation is that individuals with integrated identities do not feel the need to identity shift at all. Diefendorff and colleagues (2005) found that the natural expression of emotion was a separate emotional labor strategy that did not align with surface acting or deep acting. Those with integrated identities may align more with the natural expression of their identity than with surface shifting or deep shifting. H2 had several hypotheses related job characteristics (frequency and duration) with the shifting behaviors and burnout. Results showed that duration was the only factor related to the other variables; duration was positively related to deep shifting, marginally related to exhaustion and professional efficacy, and negatively related to cynicism. Perhaps duration of interactions is a proxy for the development of relationships with others. With that perspective, the results could be interpreted as suggesting that individuals with ongoing relationships with others deep shift in order to maintain positive relationships, which is related to less cynicism about their job (and is marginally related to less emotional exhaustion and more professional efficacy). Indeed, recent research seeking to understand more about the effects of emotional labor with coworkers has 57 found that daily deep acting towards coworkers has important implications for positive affect (Shoshan & Venz, 221). H3a-c found that surface shifting was positively related to exhaustion and negatively related to professional efficacy but not significantly related to cynicism. Surface shifting being negatively related to professional efficacy was surprising given previous findings which suggested that the main benefit of identity shifting was to “build and maintain personal and professional relationships, which are essential for social and professional advancement” (Dickens & Chavez, 2008). H3d found that surface shifting was significantly and negatively related to authenticity. H4 unexpectedly found that deep shifting was not significantly related to authenticity. The relationship was hypothesized based on previous research where deep shifting and authenticity are both related to similar positive outcomes like well-being and meaningfulness (Illies, et al., 2005; Ménard & Brunet, 2011; Schlegel et al., 2009). However, the non-significant relationship indicates that while they relate to similar outcomes, they are not related to one another. The remaining hypotheses performed as expected from past research; authenticity is positively related to well-being and professional efficacy but negatively related to cynicism and exhaustion. Areas of Opportunity for Phase II I identified three main areas of opportunity to provide additional qualitative data that would contribute to a better understanding of identity shifting and the conceptual model. These three areas stem into four main foci for Phase II. First, the unsupported relationship between job characteristics (frequency and duration) and the other constructs in the model provided an opportunity to focus on other potential antecedents, circumstances, or triggers of identity shifting. Next, although deep shifting was found to be significantly and negatively related to 58 identity integration, it was not found to be significantly related to authenticity as expected which leads to the second focus: to learn more about participant perspectives of their own identity shifting. I was specifically interested in seeing if participants differentiated between surface shifting and deep shifting as different experiences and if these experiences related to perceptions of authenticity. Lastly, surface shifting was negatively related to professional efficacy, which is surprising given previous research. Dickens and Chavez (2008) found that the main benefit of identity shifting for Black women was to “build and maintain personal and professional relationships, which are essential for social and professional advancement” suggesting that professional efficacy could be both a goal and an outcome of surface shifting. This result inspired two foci that distinguish between professional efficacy as a motivation compared to professional efficacy (or success) as an outcome: why people identity shift and the perceived outcomes of identity shifting. 59 Chapter 6: Phase II Methodology Phase II The overall methodology of this research is a mixed methods sequential explanatory research design. Phase II was constructed based on the results from Phase I. The four foci for Phase II are: 1) potential antecedents, circumstances, or triggers of identity shifting; 2) participant perspectives of their own identity shifting (distinguishing surface shifting from deep shifting); 3) why people identity shift and 4) the perceived outcomes of identity shifting. These foci were used to construct a semi-structured interview with the same participants from Phase I. To analyze the qualitative data, I used the conceptual model to create a-priori codes to categorize the data. I used an interactive approach to code the interviews, allowing themes to naturally arise in the data. Once the data was coded, I use the conceptual model to guide the explanation of the learnings from the qualitative data. This chapter reviews the methods of Phase II in depth. Participants At the end of the Phase I survey, participants were asked if they would be willing to participate in a one-hour interview about the survey. Participants that indicated “Yes” or “Maybe” from the network data collection were allowed to provide their email address to be contacted for further participation. Participants that participated through the Qualtrics panel service were not allowed to provide identifiable information. Therefore, they were instructed to reach out to the researcher via email if they were interested in participating in the one-hour interview about the survey. The limitations on collecting identifiable information through the panel service meant that the majority of Phase II invitations were sent to participants that were collected through the network approach. 60 Of the 284 participants, 76 (26.8%) selected “Yes” and provided their email, 39 (13.7%) selected “Maybe” and provided their email, 51 (18%) selected “No”, and 5 (1.7%) opted in to participate by sending an email. The remaining 113 participants (40%) were in the panel service and did not opt into participating in Phase II by sending an email. Participant selection from those that volunteered was based on those that could provide answers for the three focus areas. I began by prioritizing those that scored at the high end or low end of surface shifting, those that scored at the high or low end of deep shifting, and those that scored at the high or low end of professional efficacy. I used quartile percentages to determine high or low scores. There were no demographic characteristics that were of particular interest, so I tried to recruit a gender and aged balanced population. However, most participants that opted into the Phase II interview were female (73%), so I oversampled the male volunteers to seek a gender balance. Experimental studies in qualitative research suggest that it takes around nine interviews to establish code saturation (i.e., no new aspects of codes; “heard it all”) but between 16 and 24 interviews to achieve meaning saturation (i.e., no new aspects that contribute to understanding the code; “understand it all”) (Guest et al., 2006; Hennink et al., 2017). Dickens and Chavez (2018) used ten Black women in their qualitative study of identity shifting. Because I am sampling both Black women and Black men, I originally sought a sample size of 20. In total, 31 participants were invited to participate in an interview and 18 interviews were scheduled and completed. The majority of participants were female (83.3%), and the average age was 37.22 years (SD = 12.40 years). Higher education, law, and white-collar Corporate America were common occupational industries for the group. All participants self-identified as Black or African American; one participant identified as African and explained in her interview how her 61 identity as an African immigrant affected her perspective on her Black identity and identity shifting in the workplace. Participants were given the same choices of compensation as in Phase I: $10 Amazon gift card, $10 donated on the participant’s behalf to organizations fighting for racial equity, or to donate their time. The compensation was delivered within 5 days of completion of the interview. Procedures Phase II interview invitations were sent about one month after the conclusion of Phase I data collection. For most participants there was a four-month gap between when they took the survey and when the interview was completed. I contacted willing participants via email (see Appendix C) that included a link to schedule a one-hour interview. The scheduler app Calendly provided participants with the link to the consent form (see Appendix D), and a meeting reminder that included the link to the consent form. Participants that did not complete the form before the interview were asked to complete it before the interview began. All interviews were conducted virtually over Zoom and recorded so that they could be transcribed. Two research assistants were enlisted to help with the transcription and coding of the interviews. To make transcribing and coding easier, at least one research assistant was in each interview. They were introduced at the beginning of the interview then turned off their cameras and took notes for the remainder of the interview. The interview protocol is in Appendix E. I began all meetings by welcoming the participant and thanking them for their time. I acknowledged the informed consent form (and requested they complete it if not completed by this time) and asked permission to begin recording. I re-introduced myself in the recording and started out with an introduction about the project. I defined identity shifting (which I mentioned is related to the term code switching in 62 popular media) and began with some general questions about their workplace and everyday interactions to understand the context in which they would be providing answers. Then I began my series of semi-structured interview questions. Upon concluding the interview, I thanked them for their time and reiterated that their payment would be issued within the week. The interviews were uploaded into a password-protected private site of the university to be auto-transcribed. Next, the research assistants transcribed each interview verbatim using the recording and the auto-transcription. We then coded the interviews based on an a priori code book and, during check-in meetings, developed additional codes or emergent themes as necessary. Measures Interview Questions. The interview questions focused on four main areas identified at the end of Phase I: potential antecedents of identity shifting, participant perceptions of their identity shifting, the personal motivation to identity shift, and the perceived results of identity shifting. As demonstrated in the interview protocol, the questions were asked in an order that followed a natural conversation. After receiving the definition of identity shifting, participants were asked if they engage in identity shifting. If they answered yes, they were asked the following questions: “How do you change yourself at work?” “Why do you think you change aspects of yourself at work?” “What factors in your work environment lead you to change yourself at work?” “How does changing yourself at work affect you?” Each question had prepared sub-questions, follow-up questions, or examples to receive descriptive and thorough answers from the participant. As it was a semi-structured interview, the 63 flow of the interview was dependent on the answers that participants gave. When I completed my series of questions, I also asked the participants if there were other questions that they thought should be included to understand more about their experiences identity shifting in the workplace. A few of the suggested questions were asked in subsequent interviews, including the questions “Do you feel like you have a support system at work?” and “How did you learn how to identify shift?”. Very few participants (11%) answered that they did not feel that they identity shifted at work. For those participants, the following questions were asked: “What enables you to be authentic at work?” “Why do you think others, especially minorities or Black people, feel they have to change themselves at work?” “What are the implications of being authentic at work for you?” These questions also had sub-questions and follow-up questions. A Priori Coding Scheme. The a priori coding scheme was created using the foci of Phase II and the constructs in the conceptual model. The first level of codes were simplified versions of the foci: a) how participants identity shift, b) why participants identity shift, c) the effect of identity shifting, and d) the influences of identity shifting. The second level of code used information from the constructs in the conceptual model to categorize the themes found in the data. For a) how participants identity shift, the original a priori subcodes were: 1) behavior to align with surface shifting, and 2) cognition or attitudes to align with deep shifting. There were not any specific second level codes for b) why participants identity shift because personal motivations were not in the model. However, I originally suggested that the research assistants look out to see if approach or avoid motivations could be used as subcodes. The second level 64 codes for c) the effect of identity shifting were: 1) personal 2) professional 3) interpersonal. These were derived from categorizing the types of outcomes from previous research (Bell, 1990; Dickens & Chavez, 2018; Dickens, Womack, & Dimes, 2019). The conceptual model only covered intrapersonal effects, so this code is an addition to the model. Finally, there were no second level codes for d) the influences of identity shifting because there are a broad range of possibilities. The model presented identity-related characteristics and job characteristics as influences but given there are so many other possibilities, I did not set codes ahead of time. Each of the codes were featured in a code book that explained the meaning of each code and provided examples for the coders to use as guidance. The researcher spent two hour-long training sessions helping the research assistants familiarize themselves with the codes and practicing coding interviews. The two research assistants each coded half (nine) of the interviews. The primary researcher coded all of the interviews. All coders met at least once a week to discuss the coding process. New coding schemes were discussed and agreed upon then added to the code book. Once the researchers reached a point where there were no more emergent codes, all coders re- reviewed the previous interviews to ensure that emergent codes were captured in interviews that occurred before they were added to the code book. The final codes and their themes are reviewed in detail in the next chapter. 65 Chapter 7: Phase II Results The following chapter reviews the content gathered from the semi-structured interviews. It is important to note here that in all qualitative research, the researcher is considered an instrument in both the collection and analyses of data (Fontana & Frey, 2000; Pezalla, Pettigrew, & Miller-Day, 2012; Rubin & Rubin, 2005). A researcher’s positionality can affect every part of the research process; in qualitative interviews this includes the questions asked, the relationship between the researcher and interviewee, and the knowledge creation during the analyses process (Berger, 2015; Kacen & Chaitin, 2006; Pezalla et al., 2012). In my role as a researcher, I aimed to remain objective in my pursuit of scientific evidence, particularly wanting to highlight the unfiltered voices of Black employees. However, as a Black woman who has experience with identity shifting and a shared identity with the research participants, I recognized my unique positionality and how it might influence the research process. I engaged in reflexivity throughout Phase II to continually self-monitor the impact of my personal experiences on the research, thus enhancing the quality of the research by acknowledging the difference between personal and universal experiences. Past research has often cited reflexivity as a critical process to reach rigor, trustworthiness, and credibility within qualitative data (Buckner, 2005; Horsburgh, 2003). There were times in the analysis process where my previous knowledge and shared cultural experiences with the participants provided information that aided in the interpretation of the information, which was not accessible to my research assistants who did not share identities or experiences with the participants (one identifies as a White female, and one identifies as an Indian female). Despite some ignorance of cultural references or the underlying meaning of coded language from the participants, the interrater reliability still ranges from 60-90% across all 18 interviews. The more explicit the participants were able to be about their experiences- particularly those that used language common to the coders- the more agreement between coders. 66 Coding Table 20 shows the final codes with definitions, examples, and the frequency in which participants reported the codes as they are described in the text. The codes are reviewed in the order in which questions were asked in the interview. How Participants Identity Shift After discussing the definition of identity shifting (which they were told is also called code switching), the participants shared if they thought they identity shifted at work. There were several subcodes that emerged in the way that people described their identity shifting actions: their language patterns (including verbal and non-verbal language cues), appearance, personality shifts, and self-disclosure tendencies. These second level codes replaced the a priori coding of behavior and cognition or attitudes, which were much broader. Language. As previously mentioned, the study of identity shifting originates from the study of language for bicultural individuals and the responses from participants suggest that language is still a large part of identity shifting overall. Participants made it clear that language use and the associated non-verbal cues are an important part of establishing ones’ identity at work, particularly as a way to signal belonging and distance oneself from a racial identity. There was a clear division of dos and don’ts for the way one should speak at work as described by the participants. Do’s included using sophisticated words and jargon appropriate for the audience, enunciating words and articulating ideas very thoroughly, using a certain voice (called a professional voice, customer service voice, or White voice) while speaking, using particular tones and facial expressions, and utilizing silence when unable to do the other techniques appropriately. The list of don’ts has nuances that specify why language use as identity shifting behavior is key for this population: using any type of accent, using slang/Ebonics or informal 67 language, or being too loud or animated which may be perceived as intimidating or aggressive. For most participants, the language required of Black employees is associated with avoiding the stereotypes of Black people and assimilating into the dominant culture. The example quote in the table demonstrates that language is a part of building one’s professional identity to avoid stereotypes, particularly when the participants says that they “ingratiate others from the majority and let them know, yes, I'm safe”. Later in the interview, the participant describes the difference between the impression management others may need to do compared to the identity shifting a Black person may need to do: And so I don’t know quite how to capture that, but there's almost, there's more of a critical need, if you will, for Black people to code switch in big groups of White people. So it goes beyond just ‘let me adjust my delivery’. There's something else. There's something weightier on there like ‘let me adjust my delivery because people are not going to receive me at all’ versus ‘not receive me as well’. And the amount of “points” that I will be deemed if I don't code switch are a lot more detrimental culturally to a whole group of people- Black people- than they are to other groups that, even though they may not be ethnically the majority, they even look like majority. Eastern Europeans, for example, don't have to engage in this as much because they're not met with the same stereotypes, especially in professional situations as Black people are. Some participants (16%) felt that this language switch was not unique to Black people; they expressed that it is common amongst all working people. For example, one participant stated: If we have a high-ranking individual come in and talk to you as opposed to your co- workers across the hall or something like that, just things like ‘ain’t’- simple stuff like that- that changes, just because. And I mean like, you see me talking here. This is a 68 formal interview. So, you know, I’m talking way different, I think, than I would if I was with my friends. I think that's just common across society. White, black or whatever. At least three participants were able to name specific incidences from work where their coworkers or supervisors made their accent or use of certain words a topic of conversation, which made them uncomfortable or self-conscious of the way that they speak and what stereotypes they may be eliciting. One participant described an informal interaction with a White coworker that made her self-conscious: So at my last firm when I would talk to one of my coworkers, I would say ‘anyways’ and she actually corrected me and she's like, it's not ‘anyways’, it's ‘anyway’ without the s. So going forward, I find myself always being conscious of that like OK, if I'm saying ‘anyway’ I need to make sure I don't add the s at the end. Many participants also discussed the differences in the language that they use while identity shifting and their natural language patterns by directly comparing how they talk to their White coworkers compared to how they talk to their Black coworkers in private spaces. A participant gave the following example: So if I'm in the [Black ERG] group, if we are getting together and we're talking, then what we would say or how we will say it will be different than if I was talking to my [work] team, in our small group. So I might give a dap or a like **does handshake**, you know, or a **does nod** to our bros or our sistas in the [group]. Appearance. Over half of all participants (61.1%) discussed how their appearance was a part of the way that they identity shifted at work. In particular, hair and clothing were mentioned the most. Both men and women talked about how they wear their hair, why they make those choices, and the implications of their choices. The example quote in the table demonstrates the 69 thought process that one of the participants had when choosing a hairstyle, particularly being concerned with how she would be perceived. This was a pattern amongst participants where their concern for their professional image dictated their choices of hairstyle. On the other hand, the second most common pattern was participants that were not intentional in their consideration of hair choices and received negative or unwanted attention from coworkers, which shaped their decisions going forward. One participant described her experience this way: They make comments every time I change my hair. So my mom used to make jokes about that all the time. She's like ‘I can't change my hair, they're going to notice’. I used to laugh at that. But that's one thing that's different. The older people I work with, they will comment every time, like ‘your hair’s different’, or ‘girl you change your hair every week’. So when I first started [at this company], my hair was like a really, really deep red and I'm natural underneath my extensions, but my natural hair was a deep red curly. And then when I wear my wig, they were also a deep red. So I had to slowly transition it to black. So every time I want to switch up my hairstyles, I have to [ask myself] ‘is this much shorter than it was a week ago?’, or ‘is this wig too curly?’ or ‘are they going to notice this is like a different wig?’ I don’t even change my hair anymore…It’s a thing every time. It’s such a big deal every time. [They ask] ‘Is that your hair? All of that hair is yours? Wow. Can I touch it?’ Clothing and general appearance were discussed as ascribing to a standard of “professionalism” that required a “clean cut” look of neat, business casual or above attire. Through follow up questions to understand if this was a normal consideration of every employee or if it was specifically different for Black employees, I learned that participants felt the need to go above and beyond the standard set in their workplace just to be considered on the same 70 playing field as their coworkers. Wearing makeup, wearing tights, not participating in casual days, and having a clean shaved face were some examples of going above and beyond so their appearance was perceived well. For example, “jeans day” or “casual days” came up three times across interviews, with participants stating that they did not participate at all or participated but purposely still tried to look more than casual. One participant acknowledged that “in many spaces, the Black and Brown body is weaponized” and that she did not want to allow that to happen to her. In reference to jeans day at her company, she described: I did not want to participate. I did start participating at one point, but I would say… it'd be four years [I’ve been] at the current firm that I am, and I didn't participate for the first two in the jeans day because I just did not want to be part of that dialogue. And even when I wear jeans, now, I dress up. And for example, what I do is that I'll wear jeans. But I make sure that I'm wearing one of the nicest blazers that I have. You know, and I wear a broach pin and everything, like I'm serving Dianne Carrol [in] Dallas. You know. But I do that and I realized that I overdress so not to look as casual. And just being very hyper sensitive to and hyper aware of that. I make sure when I'm wearing the jeans, I'm not wearing flats. I'm wearing heels in the office. Like I look like I just left a brunch rather than it's casual day. There were also subtle mentions of double standard between Black employees and White employees for what is considered appropriate at work. It seemed to be an underlying notion that Black employees cannot have the same type of appearance and be considered acceptable compared to White counterparts. The example quote in the table demonstrates this subtlety in the mention of outfits that they see “other people get away with, that I know that it would probably be an issue if I came to work in that attire”. The double standards echoed throughout the 71 interviews, underlying some of the thought processes that the participants had in general about identity shifting. One participant described that those double standards were taught to her at a young age, which aligns with the later described reasons why participants identity shift. She stated: It's always been instilled in me, not just through my parents but literally my whole village, that I can't do the things that everyone else that isn't Black is doing. And so just coming here and seeing the things that everyone does that they're able to get away with, I have to understand that I can't do that. And so even though I might want to have a beer, I know that I can't do that and put it on the internet. I can't do that with coworkers. I can't have too much and have a drunken night and, you know, risk someone seeing me and bringing it to the workplace. And I can't do any of those things because there's always that chance that the consequences that should have happened to everybody that do these things and it doesn't, they'll do it with me. Personality. Another way that participants reported identity shifting was to change their personality to fit the norms and culture of the environment. Participants gave examples of being more reserved, being purposefully more pleasant or overly friendly, and adjusting their humor to fit with those around them. The next section will discuss the reasons why participants identity switch overall, but it was a natural flow of the interview for participants to explain why they adjusted their personality the way they did. All of them expressed that it was either a tactic to fit in or to shape their professional image in a way that is not stereotypical of Black people. For example, one participant described always being pleasant because she wanted to avoid being anything close to the angry black woman stereotype: 72 So just trying to dispel myths or stereotypes that previously were held, primarily those that are negative against our character. So I never allow myself- I really hate to say- ‘get out of character’. But just like not be super loud, not be overly aggressive or just really anything that will fall under the black woman trope. I can't do that because for a lot of people, specifically my industry, I’m the only black woman that a lot of them interact with. And so it’s like okay I’m just always pleasant. I literally had former bosses say ‘you never know when it goes wrong because she’s always smiling’ and it’s like, yeah, I could be having the worst day but I'm not going to allow you to take that and hold it against me. So I primarily code switch to dispel any negative preconceived notions or connotations that they may hold of black women. Self-Disclosure. Participants discussed controlling their professional image through how much they disclosed about themselves to coworkers and which conversations they chose to engage in. Their identity shifting was switching to a version of themselves that was more selective about the details that they revealed to coworkers, which is different than how they would typically interact with others. Many of the things they chose not to disclose were either aspects of their life associated with their culture and Black identity or things they felt they would be judged about. For example, one participant described feeling hesitant sharing any of his interests at one job for fear of being stereotyped but openly shared his love for rap music with his colleagues at a different job where he could be authentic. Similarly, some participants actively avoided certain conversations at work. These conversations were described as being related to race or current events that have racial undertones, such as the protests/riots that occurred in 2020. One participant stated: 73 And you have all these people that want to talk about it and give you their thoughts, opinions about the marches that have happened here… And giving their definitely biased opinion about how that was not necessary… It's like you just assume that because I was Black these were conversations I would want to have with you. I just want to come to work, do my job, go home. I don't need you to constantly remind me throughout the day that I'm black, you know. Although it does not fall into the code of self-disclosure, it is important to note that there were participants that felt the opposite- they wanted to engage in race-related conversations at work more often but were not given the opportunity or were shut down if they tried. Across these different subcodes of how participants view their identity shifting, there were some overarching patterns in how people described their identity shifting. I noticed that many participants described a hypervigilance in maintaining the professional image that they created. They described taking a long time to make strategic decisions about their presentation, overthinking situations where they might have engaged in identity shifting, and constantly iterating their approach as new situations arise. Many participants described the stress that this hypervigilance causes. As one participant described it: I do believe it creates stress because there is this reality that before I even arrived in a situation, I have thought it through ten times. I've over thought it, in fact, so much so that by the time that I'm arrived, into the moment that I've over thought, I can't even enjoy the moment. I can't even be here because I have to be ten steps ahead of right here now because I had to be ten steps ahead to get here. Another overarching pattern is how participants eventually settle into their professional identity. Many describe becoming more authentic as they grew more comfortable with 74 themselves and developed trusting relationships with their colleagues. Both younger and older participants recognized that one’s professional image is also built on the quality of their work, which can relax expectations of a professional identity over time. The more a person’s reputation can be built on their professional contributions, the more they can be authentic without worries of non-work related judgements and stereotypes. Why Participants Identity Shift Participants often naturally went into an explanation of why they identity shifted when explaining how they identity shift. I still followed the semi-structured interview protocol and asked participants why they identity shift at work which often prompted deeper thought and consideration. The answers given were complex and do not fit cleanly into categories that might be associated with the conceptual model such as antecedents or job characteristics. The coders were initially instructed to consider whether the answers followed an approach or avoid motivation, but we often found that the reasons given could be both or neither, so it was not a useful classification. The subcategories for why participants identity switch going from the broadest to the most specific include: maintaining generational safety practices, assimilation, a fear of being judged or stereotyped, and to achieve professional success. Maintaining Generational Safety Practices. Identity shifting was not always a conscious or pre-meditated part of one’s constructed professional. Many participants discussed being taught by their community from a young age that identity shifting is a necessary part of surviving as a Black person in America. The answers given paralleled some of the literature reviewed early in the models of second-culture acquisition as described by LaFromboise and colleagues (1993). Like the alternation model, participants describe watching their parents alternate their behavior between two cultures and purposefully maintaining the pride of their 75 African American culture. Like the acculturation model, participants described the absolute necessity of shifting behaviors for survival. When asked why she identity shifts, one participant described it this way: To survive. I think that one thing that I often share with when people who asked me questions like that is I remind them that my mom is one generation from Jim Crow. Like I am one generation from Jim Crow. She grew up in the Jim Crow South. And for her, code switching2, as we have defined it- back then they didn't have a word for it- code switching saved your life. Code switching made sure you had a job. Code switching made sure that you could get certain things. You might have an opportunity to do or be or go somewhere and it changed your quality of life. And for me, one of the reasons why I don't bring my full self in those spaces is that I want to have a specific quality of life while I'm employed here. For me, it is that serious. I take it that seriously. This is survival. This is nothing more than when a chameleon changes colors to blend in into the dark to avoid from avoid predators. That's exactly what I'm doing. From having parents and elders that identity shift and taught them, to having early childhood experiences of identity shifting that they were coached through, participants identified identity shifting as an engrained survival mechanism at the communal or societal level rather than an individual motivation or conscious decision. To Fit In/Assimilate. Participants also specified that they identity switch to fit in at work. This answer was often times very connected to the generational safety practices because they were taught from a young age that it is beneficial to fit in with the majority population. 2 In the interview, participants often used code switching in the place of identity shifting. The way in which “code switching” was used referenced more than just language, which are the limits of the construct within academia. 76 However, some participants did not grow up in environments that taught them to identity switch so college or the workplace was the first time they stood out from everyone else because of their racial identity. Fitting in was described in two ways. Some described fitting in as the absence of standing out because of their racial identity, such as being hyper-visible or tokenized. Fitting in was also described as being accepted as a part of the in-group. In both descriptions, fitting in was seen as an important first step towards being accepted by the majority group, which is necessary for professional success. Participants described their workplaces as having “standards of acceptability” that were mostly unspoken which were created by and catered to their White counterparts. A participant described the pressure to assimilate to the “standard” this way: I do feel like I need to fit certain cultural norms that have been established for people in these positions of power. And you know, like I said, a lot of times it does look like middle-aged white people, specifically middle-aged white men. And do I want to act like and move like a middle-aged white man? No, I would love to be able to come in and like freely be myself, but I just don't think that we live in a world right now, particularly in corporate America, where companies are willing to fully embrace that. They might embrace some of it, or they might embrace having a woman or a person of color or a Black person in leadership. But they still want them to conform to those traditional values and standards. Like they want you for your representation, but they don't want the full you. Bell and Nkomo (2001) also found that Black women felt they had to assimilate to gain acceptance in White dominated organizations. Fear Of Being Judged/Stereotyped. The fear of being judged and/or stereotyped seemed to be the “other side of the coin” to fitting in. Participants were fearful of behaving in 77 ways that would make them an “other” or an outcast because of perceptions of negative stereotypes of Black people. They specifically named aggressive, angry, lazy, and uneducated as stereotypes that were actively avoiding. These stereotypes would mean that they would achieve less professional success because their work would be considered through a biased lens or that they would experience potential discrimination or mistreatment. Like in the example given for how participants changed their personality, some were fearful that confirming stereotypes would reflect badly on all Black people, which previous researchers refer to as pressure to be the ‘Model Black Citizen’. For some participants, avoiding those stereotypes caused them to build a professional image that was far from their true selves. For others, it meant being hypervigilant about the way they present themselves verbally and non-verbally. Many participants gave examples of feeling judged or stereotyped and they subsequently changed their professional identities. For example, one participant described a time where a coworker misread concentration as anger, and she subsequently was hypervigilant about her body language. In another example, a participant gives an example of why she changed her self-disclosure patterns after feeling judged: I will say there was one example where I shared with someone who I thought was kind of open-minded that I was going to be an aunt soon. My brother is having the baby; he’s younger than me, so he’s like 19, so that perception was automatically like ‘Oh he’s not married? I thought you were the oldest’ and like she started priming for more [answers]. So as I was saying this, I automatically- and I can see ‘cuz we’re on zoom so I can see their reaction to this- and I automatically felt judged. Absolutely judged… So that was an example of me being like, you know, I’m going to keep things to myself. I feel like when 78 I do let those things out people are just like ‘oh’ or I think it’s like confirmation bias, like their like ‘oh that confirms what I thought about Black people’ or whatever. To Achieve Professional Success. Many participants said that they identity shift in order to gain professional success. Identity shifting is necessary to gain the precursors to professional success, such as likability from colleagues and respect for their credentials. Some participants considered identity shifting a normal part of the professional world for everyone, as mentioned in the quote above where a participant discussed how changing language was common in society across races. However, the majority of participants that identity shift for professional success discussed the relationship between lessening the emphasis on their Black identity and gaining the precursors to professional success. For example, when asked why Black people specifically may feel they have to identity shift, one participant said: …[If] I want to progress in this department or in this area, I want to be accepted. So in order for me to do that, I need to make sure that I'm in line with whatever identity or whatever standard that's within that environment and not necessarily interject too much of my identity. Because if I interject too much of my identity, I may jeopardize my ability to progress and people may look at me in a certain way… And if that means that I have to adhere to these standards, then that's what, that's what I'm going to do. And even if that means me not talking about what my favorite artists are, which may be hip hop artists or my experiences growing up within a certain urban environment, they probably are willing to do that in order to not be looked upon as the other and to still progress in their work environment. Some participants even gave examples of when they did not identity shift and it affected their professional advancement. A participant described starting a job being her authentic self, which 79 is quiet and reserved, but that did not proactively counter the Black women stereotypes and it affected her ability to be promoted: Before I was forced to [identity shift], I think it made it easier for people to like write me off. Like people don't even [know], they just assume I don't have a degree, or I've never went to school before. Not that I misbehave or anything at work. I don’t act a fool at work. I'm just really reserved, quiet. I've always been told to keep your head down and work your butt off and then people are going to recognize your hard work. But in certain environments, no. I didn't know that… I think I missed out on a promotion, a few months ago actually. So I think that's, you know, as a result of me not code switching because then people, even if rumors aren’t true, they just assume that they are. ‘She's unpleasant, she's rude.’ It doesn't have to be founded in any type of truths. So I do think that not code switching has prevented me from getting a promotion. All of the reasons for identity shifting were either distally or directly connected to each other. Black employees all identity shift because they want to be treated fairly and receive an equal opportunity to achieve at work. The Effects of Identity Shifting After understanding how and why the participants engaged in identity shifting, I asked about the effects of identity shifting for them. Given the unexpected results in Phase I, I asked follow-up questions about the personal, professional, and interpersonal effects of identity shifting. Participants most often described how identity shifting affected them personally without prompting. Some did not have answers to describe all of the follow up questions and I did not push them to create any. As a reminder, the frequency scores represent the number of times 80 participants responded in the way that the codes are described here, not just responded about personal, professional, or interpersonal effects at all. Personally. Half of participants described identity shifting as a stressful and frustrating experience. They explained it as draining and taxing for many different reasons, including identifying hypervigilance and overthinking as additional work they have to do just to be on the same playing field as other employees as demonstrated in the quote in the table. One participant described their experience as really affecting their mental health: I think code switching is like damaging my mental health. Like, I'm exhausted all the time. I get overwhelmed at the thought of going to work because I just don't think I'm mesh well there… And everyday I'm just forced to be someone else. I have to dress like I'm older. I have to pretend like I don't listen to the music everyone listens to, just things like that. And honestly its overwhelming to a point where when I get home I'm exhausted. I don't even want to go anywhere. I just want to lay down and sleep and then get up and do it all over again. In their (2018) report, researchers at Catalyst call this phenomenon emotional tax. They describe emotional tax as “the combination of feeling different from peers at work because of gender, race, and/or ethnicity and the associated effects on health, well-being, and ability to thrive at work.”. Some experiences that exacerbate the emotional tax are the fear of being stereotyped, receiving unfair treatment, or feeling othered. Participant’s main description of the personal effects of identity shifting are aligned with emotional tax. Many participants acknowledged the unique effects of external events on their experience identity shifting. A participant described the experience well, particularly referencing how the 81 social unrest (i.e., murder of George Floyd and Breanna Taylor and subsequent events) has caused their coworkers to realize how the events affect Black employees: I can't speak for everyone, but one of the things that I've always had to do is put exterior noise in the background. And what I mean by that is like, you know, current events or world events or things like that that are like traumatic, particularly to Black people or People of Color. And I saw a lot of people really coming to the realization like ‘oh, these things really affect certain people more than others’, particularly this year with all the protests and everything else. But you know prior to that it was like something major can happen and you could be feeling terrible, but you still have to get up and go to work. And they expect you to be firing on all cylinders and giving 100% and running team meetings and everything else. And you can’t always function in that way. Like it can be very traumatic. So, I think that code switching definitely can have a negative effect on, you know, relationships and work as well as your mental health because it, it takes a toll on you. Recent research theorizes about employees being affected by events external to their workplace. In a more general conceptualization, Leigh and Melwani (2019) developed a theoretical model of mega-threats, which they define as “negative, large-scale, diversity-related episodes that receive significant media attention. They propose that mega-threats lead to identity fusion between the organizational (i.e., professional) and social (i.e., racial) selves, which influence behaviors in the workplace. More specifically, McCluney and colleagues (2017) developed a conceptual model of the way racially traumatic events- or racially motivated incidents that “overwhelms a person’s capacity to cope, causes bodily harm”- relate to individual and organizational behavior. The model suggests that racially traumatic events, like a viral video of a police officer shooting a 82 Black person, can cause racial identity threat that may be relieved through organizational or social identity resourcing. Both theoretical approaches offer an understanding of the way participants describe feeling at work due to negative events in the environment and offer ways to reduce these feelings. A few participants described how identity shifting caused them internal conflict because they wanted to act like or be closer to themselves but felt they could not if they wanted to keep their job. Overall, no one explained any effects on them personally that were positive. Professionally. Unlike the personal effects, participants did describe some positive effects of identity shifting on their career. Participants identified that identity shifting helped them achieve acceptance and increase their opportunities to advance in the company. Identity shifting also helped others feel more connected to them, which translated into more professional opportunities. This was also identified as a benefit of identity shifting in Dickens and Chavez’s (2018) qualitative study. Some of the previous quotes demonstrate the negative professional consequences. The quote from the participant about missing a promotion illustrate the effect of not engaging in identity shifting. The quote in the table for personal effects also acknowledged that identity shifting created negative effects on their performance. The need to “double filter” everything affected her performance, confidence, and willingness to speak up. That participant continued with an example of when she was not able to double filter, and the effects of using her authentic voice: Like when I get very animated or passionate about a topic that's when it starts to get hard to code switch, especially if it's like a D&I [diversity and inclusion] topic. And this even proceeded my time on my current team, but we were talking about something D&I 83 related and I was extremely passionate, and it was almost like I just couldn't- the code switching was stopping my words in the pipeline. And so I had to uncork it, just be like ‘Look here, no that can’t go down like that and here's why.’ And my points were still on a research base but I didn't have the luxury of time to refilter everything in my head, I just had to let it come out. And I know that the reaction was like ‘She was aggressive and ghetto in a way.’ I could tell by the like reactions afterward. Even somebody came to me was like, ‘you know, you may want to learn how to reel it in a little bit’ I think are the words they used… In reality, I only had only had one shot to get my point across to some executives were who are all white and the way in which I delivered it probably, unfortunately, turned them off. So that was like a negative consequence in the way somebody responded. Another reported negative effect of identity shifting was that it created an image and social expectations that they had to maintain, even if they eventually wanted to part from it. Overall, participants thought there were both positive and negative effects of identity shifting to their career. Interpersonally. While getting others to accept you is a positive outcome for their professional career, many participants expressed that they are unable to establish meaningful relationships with others in their workplace. Participants expressed internal turmoil about developing relationships where coworkers only know their professional self because the relationships lack depth or significance. The example quote in the table explores this concern: ‘Cuz sometimes I wonder it's like, dang are we really friends? Because I can't bring my, like they don't know [Me] fully. Like they know, I would say about 70% of [Me]. Sure. It's not so drastic that that I would say that they wouldn't know me at all. But my friends 84 know me, and they know me fully. And even when I make mistakes or even when I'm just being a jerk or whatever, they would know me. Whereas these people only know a portion of me. They know, my presentation, they know my representative, my facade, my superficies, you know, they don't know me fully. And I wonder about that. And it's like, could we be cool outside of this? If there was not a specific location or a domain where we had to interact, would we even want to know each other fully, fully? In some cases, participants expressed that having surface level relationships did not produce any professional benefits; the professional benefits only went to employees that had deeper relationships that participants felt they could not establish because their identities were too different than their coworkers. One participant described how not having deeper relationships with others prevents one’s social network from growing: I think socially it creates these barriers and almost forces you to navigate back to a place of comfort with the [Black women] which is wonderful, right, because that's a source of strength but it is not going to help you socially in terms of the diversification of your circles and your networks at work, and trusting circles and networks that are also part of your career development and how you advance and how you just expand even laterally. So, it's crippling in that regard, especially with the extreme combination of black women and white males. And white males are the gatekeepers. A surprising effect on interpersonal relationships was a lack of trust that stemmed from non- Black coworkers that witnessed them identity shift. For example, one participant expressed that it would be jarring for a White coworker to see and hear the conversations in the Black ERG because it is so starkly different than how the Black employees talk and relate when they are in 85 the majority group. Overall, there was a lot of concern for the lack of genuine relationships that are developed because of identity shifting. Organizational Influences on Identity Shifting In addition to why participants identity shift, I wanted to know if there were any causes or triggers to their identity shifting. Identity shifting is proposed to be episodic and can be switched back and forth between. However, participants mostly described identity shifting as a permanent professional image that is presented at all times at work, except when in a safe space. The organizational influences that were named as to why they developed their professional identity with identity shifting include their organizational leaders, organizational culture, and the demographics of the organization. Organizational leaders. Organizational leaders- such as one’s direct supervisor or high ranking/highly visible executives- were described as direct influences over participants’ identity shifting choices, as well as influences over the culture of their work teams. Existing research discusses the importance of inclusive leadership in workplace outcomes such as performance or turnover (Nishii & Mayer, 2009; Xiaotao, Yang, Diaz, & Yu, 2018), but has yet to explore how leadership influences employees’ ability to be authentic in the workplace. Participants with supervisors that encouraged authenticity and authentic bonding in the office were more comfortable being their authentic selves in the workplace. Participants with supervisors that promoted a particular organizational image or supervisors that directly told employees how to behave “appropriately” were very careful to identity switch to the standards encouraged. Only three (16.7%) participants described the way that organizational leaders influenced their identity shifting behavior. The leaders at their company changed policies, provided examples of different forms of authenticity, and actively promoted cultures of authenticity at 86 their company. One of the participants sometimes worked with these top leaders at her company, which allowed her to directly observe the way that Black leaders expressed their identities. Culture. Participants frequently described the way that their organizational culture influenced them to identity switch or not. The continuum of descriptions ranged from ‘toxic’ or ‘hostile’ to ‘inclusive’ or ‘accepting’, with participants in healthier environments feeling freer to be authentic and participants in unhealthy environments feeling forced to identity switch to survive at the company. Most participants that described culture as an influence explained the unspoken standards of behavior and how it influences them, as mentioned earlier. For example, the quote in the table shows how one participant perceived that dreadlocks were not an acceptable form of appearance so he would not pursue that aesthetic for fear of not being accepted. Demographics. The most frequently referenced organizational influence on identity shifting (44.4%) was the racial demographics of the organization. Participants expressed several different types of experiences as a result of being a racial minority including tokenism, hypervisibility, othering, pressure to be the Model Black citizen, and imposter syndrome. All but one participant expressed that they would identity switch less if they were in a more diverse organization. One participant expressly pointed out that top leadership in his organization was mostly White and employees at the bottom were Black or other people of color. This inequity in his organizations and left him with very few examples of how Black people could be authentic and succeed in the organization. Conclusion Phase II had four primary foci based on the results of Phase I. The first focus was on potential antecedents, circumstances, or triggers of identity shifting. The identity shifting 87 antecedents were characteristics of the organization in which they built their professional identity around. The organizational culture, demographics of the organization, and company leaders (including direct supervisors) were all antecedents of identity shifting. Each of these characteristics contributed to participant perceptions about the suitability of their whole self for the organization and the degree to which they felt they had to change themselves to create a successful professional identity. The second focus was on understanding the way participants define and describe identity shifting, particularly to distinguish between surface shifting and deep shifting and to understanding the relationship with authenticity. Identity shifting was mostly defined as an experience aligned with surface shifting rather than deep shifting. Surface shifting is defined as if a person is hiding his or her true self, while deep shifting is defined as a person’s effort to try to be the person they are expected to be for a job. Changing one’s language, appearance, personality, and self-disclosure habits line up with surface shifting because participants maintain their cultural alternative and do not seek to make permanent changes for the sake of the job. Only a small number of participants (2 or 11%) mentioned identity shifting in ways that align with deep shifting. For example, one participant described learning to be more effective by managing the presentation of emotion, specifically to avoid stereotypes and still get the job accomplished: But if …you're angry about something, we may not show that, you know, and so the person that you are, you might be a cool anger versus a hot anger. You can learn how to manage them. We still may be angry, but you might just respond in a different way than if you were to just being a self that's less either experienced, mature, or refined, I think you’re still being authentic self, but you might be your 20-year-old self versus your 45- year-old self. I'll be a little different because you learned what is effective. 88 The learning the participant described was an identity management tool that became part of her personality and authentic self. In that way, it could describe deep shifting where she recognized a way she needed to be for the job and learned to be that. Other participants described becoming more settled in their authentic selves over time, which could be an outcome of deep shifting. If that person was working towards integrating their cultural self and professional self to form just one identity, deep shifting was likely part of that process. That could account for the non- significant relationship between deep shifting and authenticity; deep shifting is a process of identity development that is unrelated to one’s evaluation of authenticity. One limitation of all qualitative research is that participants may not be able to recognize or articulate certain experiences, particularly if they have never thought about them before (Rubin & Rubin, 2005). Deep shifting describes an internal, psychological process that has less outwardly evidence of occurring. Therefore, participants may be limited in their ability to recognize or describe this experience compared to surface shifting. The surface shifting themes are easily noticeable occurrences for participants because they can be directly contrasted to some alternative behavior. Deep shifting could be considered an identity development process, which is long term and often unconscious. Interviews may not be the best method for investigating this process. The next focus was on why people identity shift. I found that participants ultimately identity shift in the workplace to achieve professional success. In order to achieve professional success, they identity shift to fit in with the norms of their workplace and to avoid being judged or stereotyped. For some participants, identity shifting had been taught as a survival mechanism from previous generations and employed the technique in the workplace. 89 The last focus was on the perceived effects of identity shifting for the individual. For personal effects, participants reported stress and internal conflict as a result of identity shifting. The professional implications were both positive and negative. Professional success, particularly through gaining and maintaining acceptance from others, was seen as an effect of identity shifting. The negative effect was on performance given the additional identity-related work that identity shifting causes. The interpersonal effect of identity shifting is the inability to develop trusting and meaningful relationships with others, even after gaining sought after acceptance. In the next chapter, I will discuss the results of Phase I and Phase II together. The implications and limitations of this research will be reviewed along with a discussion for recommended next steps. 90 Chapter 8: Discussion Phase I and Phase II Results Discussion The purpose of employing a mixed-methods sequential explanatory research design in this study was to contribute some quantitative data to the identity shifting literature and provide additional context for their statistical relationships with qualitative data as well as build on existing qualitative data. In Phase I, I conducted a cross-sectional survey of Black employees to test the proposed relationships in the conceptual model. Using the results of Phase I, I constructed a semi-structured interview protocol to investigate some unsupported relationships and remaining questions for Phase II. In this section, I review the information from both phases together to make comprehensive conclusions about identity shifting and the proposed conceptual model. I walk through the conceptual model and discuss the results from Phase I and Phase II. Antecedents The results of Phase I found significant relationships between identity integration and identity shifting behaviors. Specifically, the more integrated one’s identity was, the less they engaged in surface shifting or deep shifting. It is possible that an individual with a fully integrated identity is comfortable expressing their full identity as is, which parallels the distinctive construct of naturally felt emotions in the emotional labor literature. Exploratory analyses on measures of Black identity suggest that one’s private regard for their race is negatively related to surface shifting yet positively related to deep shifting, perhaps suggesting that those with positive racial attitudes that do not have integrated racial and professional identities resolve it through evolving their identity (i.e., deep shifting) rather than trying to fake an identity (i.e., surface shifting). One’s racial centrality is also positively related to deep shifting, which supports this hypothesis. 91 The conceptual model proposed that aspects of one’s job was related to identity shifting. The duration of interacting with others on a daily basis was positively related to deep shifting but neither the duration of interacting with others, nor the frequency of interacting with others was related to surface shifting. If duration is a proxy for ongoing relationships with coworkers, perhaps deep shifting would be more commonplace. Gabriel and colleagues (2020) found that deep acting is more common amongst coworker relationships than surface acting, and deep shifting and surface shifting may mirror the same patterns. The duration of interacting with others was directly and negatively related to the cynicism subfactor of burnout and marginally related to exhaustion and professional efficacy. Again, if viewed as a proxy for the development of relationships with coworkers, duration could be related to less cynicism, less emotional exhaustion, and more professional efficacy. Gabriel and colleagues’ (2020) research may also support this theory, finding that individuals that deep act with coworkers experience low emotional exhaustion. The same may be true for individuals that deep shift with coworkers. Phase II found several organizational influences on identity shifting. Participants reported that organizational culture, leaders, and demographics were all related to identity shifting. The inclusiveness of the culture, the commitment and direct support of leaders, and the diversity of the organization were factors of the organization that dictated whether participants felt they had to identity shift or not. Although culture and leaders were not measured specifically, racial demographics were measured in Phase I and were used for control variables in all of the analyses involving surface shifting and deep shifting. One’s racial composition of their work location and of their organization’s leaders were related to many of the outcome variables, supporting the relationship between demographics and identity shifting behaviors. The fact that participants 92 identified organizational factors rather than particular triggers or incidents supports the view that identity management does not just occur in bounded context or certain situations, but that one’s professional identity is built around long-term factors of the work environment. Identity Shifting I proposed two identity shifting constructs that parallel the emotional labor constructs and represent the labor of this specific identity management strategy. Surface shifting is positively related to exhaustion and negatively related to professional efficacy. I predicted that surface shifting would be positively related to professional efficacy given past research that found professional success to be one of the benefits of identity shifting (Dickens & Chavez, 2018). The results from Phase II help to differentiate between professional success as an outcome of identity shifting and professional efficacy as an intrapersonal effect of identity shifting. Participants discussed how identity shifting caused decreased efficacy through an emotional tax produced by hyper-vigilance and overthinking. New findings on construed image work suggest that individuals that must construct or reconstruct their professional image experience cognitive and affective disorientation (Williams & Murphy, 2021), which may align with the results here. This type of “labor” makes identity shifting unique from but still parallel to the emotional labor strategies. If identity shifting encompasses more than emotion whereas the emotional labor constructs only reflect emotion, then to magnitude of the toll it takes on a person should theoretically be greater. The parallels between identity management and emotional labor should continue to be explored. Surface shifting was found to be negatively related to authenticity as expected based on previous research on parallel emotional labor constructs. Exploratory analyses found that the paths from identity integration to the outcomes (directly to burnout, to burnout through 93 authenticity, and to well-being through authenticity) using surface shifting as a mediator had moderate fits. Unlike surface shifting, deep shifting was not found to significantly relate to authenticity. The aforementioned exploratory analyses on measures of Black identity could indicate that deep shifting is an identity development process that is separate from the experience of authenticity, focusing more on resolving different identities. Phase II did not provide any additional context to the non-significant relationship; participants’ description of identity shifting primarily aligned with surface shifting. Although it is likely that participants do not have the language or foresight to describe deep shifting, it is also possible that participants engaged in less deep shifting than surface shifting, which diverges from the findings of surface acting and deep acting (Gabriel, Koopman, Arnold, & Hochwarter, 2020). Though identity shifting was described by participants in language similar to that of the quantitative measure (“putting on a show”, “wearing a mask”), the main themes of identity shifting were more specific to participants’ experiences. They described changing their language, appearance, personality, and their normal self-disclosure patterns as forms of identity shifting. Most participants provided examples by directly contrasting their ‘normal’ behavior with how they behaved in the workplace. The examples were laden with identity-related concerns for how their real self would be perceived. For example, while dressing for the workplace seems like a normal impression management technique, participants pointed out race related double standards in perceptions of appearance or concerns unique to Black employees (i.e., natural hair in the workplace). When comparing these qualitative answers to the measure of suppression, there are some areas of overlap. The suppression measure includes an item about ones’ “language, vernacular, or speech style” similar to the emphasis on language described in the interviews. The measure also features two items about avoiding discussions about racial identity and a few of the 94 items suggest hiding or de-emphasizing racial/ethnic cues (cultural objects, emblems, meaningful dates, food, music). Future considerations of identity shifting or identity management should include appearance and personality items to offer a more complete view of the phenomenon as described first hand by Black employees. Hair is an especially relevant identity management behavior that is getting more recent attention (Koval & Rosette, 2021). A 2017 national survey show that this is still an issue, reporting that Black women are being pressured to straighten their hair for work twice as many times as White women (Johnson, Godsil, MacFarlane, Tropp, & Goff, 2017). Individual Outcomes The results of Phase I confirmed the previously established relationship between authenticity and well-being and the relationship between authenticity and burnout. To learn more about the types of individual outcomes, participants were specifically prompted to describe personal, professional, and interpersonal outcomes in the Phase II interviews. The personal effects of identity shifting were mainly described as stress-related outcomes such as frustration, internal conflict, and even burnout. These are aligned with the quantitative well-being and burnout measures used in Phase I but the stress measures provide additional quantitative support. Participants described the professional outcomes as professional success, particularly through knocking down perceived barriers to success like fitting in with the majority population. Dickens and Chavez (2018) similarly found that a benefit to identity shifting was building and maintaining relationships with colleagues, which was important for professional success. However, identity shifting caused some negative effects on performance due to the stress and labor associated with it. This perspective provides support for the negative relationship between surface shifting and professional efficacy found in Phase I. Finally, participants discussed having 95 superficial relationships with others at work as an interpersonal implication of identity shifting. Wessel and colleagues (2019) propose superficial relationships as an inauthentic experience for minorities related to work outcomes such as well-being, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Future research could consider how each of these types of outcomes are related to other work outcomes. Concepts Outside of the Model In addition to the findings of organizational influences on identity shifting behaviors, Phase II added more context about the underlying motivation for Black employees to identity shifting. My original intention in inquiring about motivation was to connect the motivation to identity shift to the perceived outcomes of identity shifting, even though motivation was not in the model. Participants shared motivations that ranged from high-level, social-identity based motivations to more specific job-related motivations. One reason to identity shift that stands out as being unique to Black people is the maintenance of generational safety practices; identity shifting has been passed down from older generations as a survival mechanism for Black people to stay safe and employed, and has become a tool for Black people to succeed. This is starkly different from the experience of impression management which may be common to every person, regardless of their race. Participants also reported identity shifting to fit in or assimilate and to avoid being judged or stereotyped, both reasons related to their racial identity. Lastly, participants reported identity shifting to achieve professional success. Although this may be generalized across groups, many of the participants answers focused on the need to make their identity ‘safe’ in order to achieve professional success. These motivations stem from the historical implications of race in American society and likely influence the development of one’s Black identity along with all other types of identities. It is an important consideration when 96 contemplating how organizations may lessen the work that racial minorities have to do to fit in at work. There should be multi-level solutions that address systemic issues (such as stereotypes) inside and outside of the organization. Indeed, McCluney and colleagues (2017) suggest that organizations can lessen the identity threat of Black employees through generating resources that alleviate external influence (i.e., racial trauma), such as a compassionate culture, high-quality connections amongst employees, and the use of senior leadership. Each of these resources has been mentioned in this study in relation to identity shifting- organizational culture, genuine connections with coworkers, and organizational leadership. They propose that these and other resources lead to a psychologically safe environment and identity safety for Black employees. Limitations A general limitation that affected many studies collected in the year 2020 is the COVID- 19 pandemic. The pandemic disrupted many aspects of ordinary life in the United States, including employment and employment contexts. The stress of the pandemic was accounted for using the perceived stress scale, however, participants experienced changes like working from home that could have temporarily altered the way they experienced identity shifting. For example, one participant stated: And I will say that one of the things that has come out of COVID 19 and having to work from home has been me having to do less of [identity shifting] because I don't have to interact with people face to face every day anymore. And it's more so just me interacting with my team and it's only on meetings. So it's not me sitting at my desk and someone walking by and like thinking because I'm focused on my work that I'm angry or something. I don't have to worry about all that external pressure. 97 Research has not yet considered how identity management differs in the virtual working world or how it occurs over a digital platform (i.e., working virtually). Hennekam and colleagues’ (2021) newly published a study did find that the pandemic was a multi-domain work-life shock event that impacted both family and work identities. It may be possible, then, that one’s identities (racial and professional) are changing through the pandemic. The timing and duration of these changes are unknown. Given that the present study occurred shortly after the pandemic shutdowns began in the United States, the results of the study should not vary greatly from if the participants had been surveyed during a normal period. There were three main limitations in the research design. The sample size in Phase I provided sufficient data for the individual analysis of each hypothesis but may not have been a large enough sample size to meet the power threshold to analyze the complex model as a whole. It also would have been beneficial to interview more participants for Phase II but it was difficult to get more volunteers from the existing sample. Future studies may consider a larger sample size to ensure enough power for the complex model. Secondly, Phase I was a cross-sectional survey, which is limited in its ability to provide evidence of causal relationships. Lastly, the biggest limitation in Phase II is a common limitation in interviews that has been reviewed with the lack of deep switching described in the interviews. In order to describe personal or psychological experiences, there is a level of self-awareness and self-reflection required to recognize your experiences and the ability to articulate that in an interview setting (Rubin & Rubin, 2005). Some participants had never thought about identity shifting before and were actively processing their experiences during the interview. Others were keenly aware of their identity shifting behaviors and had discussed it with others, giving them the language and ability to communicate it well. An alternative approach would be to have ongoing conversations 98 with employees about identity shifting. That would allow the opportunity for them to think about the construct, reflect on how they experience it, and observe themselves as they engage or do not engage in particularly behaviors. Implications This study advances the field of identity management first by integrating the emotional labor and identity management literatures to propose new constructs. Several parallels between the constructs were proposed and a few were discovered from the results of the study. Surface shifting and deep shifting performed in similar ways to surface acting and deep acting, providing a unique way to classify types of identity management behaviors. The parallel of identity management as additional “labor”, similar to the emotional labor literature, is important for the conceptualization in the identity management literature going forward. Identity shifting in this study also advances the field by going beyond identity management that takes place within a bounded context. Although there are some identity management studies that measure identity management over time, they specifically review the unfolding of an invisible (e.g., disclosure for lesbian or gay employees; King et al., 2017) or dynamic identity (e.g., pregnancy disclosure; Jones et al., 2013; King & Botsford, 2009) identity. These approaches do not span long periods of time. Results support that identity shifting is a response to ongoing societal, organizational, and job characteristics. This should expand the theorizing of identity management from a singular occurrence perspective to the perspective that it is an ongoing part of identity development/presentation. Research on the development of professional identities primarily only considers how it may conflict with other identities (e.g., Ibarra, 1999; Settles, 2004) and rarely discusses the influence of stigmatized identities in the development of a professional identity (with notable exceptions such as Roberts, 2005; Slay & Smith, 2011). The 99 present research emphasizes the importance of one’s stigmatized identity- particularly racial identity- in both the building and maintenance of a professional identity, and the impact of that work on the individual. The qualitative data builds upon previous research to understand how individuals view their own identity shifting behaviors and why they utilize them. This is the first study to contribute quantitative data to the identity shifting literature. The general measure of surface shifting and deep shifting and the manifestation and suppression scales presented a new way to operationalize identity shifting and connect it to other constructs. Nevertheless, the firsthand descriptions from the interviews of Black employees captured additional nuance that was not captured by the quantitative measures. Given the sufficient research on identity shifting in the workplace for Black employees (although widely spread over time and fields), the results featured in this paper may provide enough theoretical and empirical groundwork to develop a measure of identity shifting for Black employees. The literature review discusses how the approach to identity management literature has been primarily divided by identity such that each is studied differently, and universal truths are hard to come by. Therefore, I propose that a quantitative measure that recognizes the unique experiences of Black employees in the workplace would enable the field to build more theory, identify processes, relate more outcomes, and ultimately produce meaningful implications. There are also several practical implications from this study. Researchers may contemplate how identity shifting outcomes contribute to disparities in the workplace (i.e., pay equity, work- related well-being, etc.) and how continual identity management upholds them. The results highlight several areas that practitioners can begin to dismantle the “standards” that influence minorities to manage their identity, including their organizational cultures, the diversity of their 100 organization, and the cultural competence and leadership capabilities of their people leaders. Wessel and colleagues (2019) make recommendations for promoting inclusive authenticity within organizations, which directly address the conditions of organizations that promote inauthentic experiences such as identity management. Again, the recognition that some of the motivation to identity shift stems from historical and societal ills, organizations should also seek multi-level solutions that address systemic issues. Organizations can go beyond viewing themselves as an a-historical, race-neutral entity and provide anti-racism resources to employees as a multi-level approach to racial inequality in the workplace (McCluney et al., 2020; Ray, 2019). Future Studies Future research can consider several different avenues to advance the field given the results of this study. This study focused on the unique experience of Black employees and only certain portions of the results may generalize to other populations. The identity shifting measures were conceptualized to parallel the emotional labor strategies in a way that captures the experiences of all visible stigmas (i.e., the identity requirements, identity regulation, and identity performance). Yet, the identity management research proves that each identity has rich nuances that lead to different outcomes. Future research could focus on generalizing findings of identity shifting across groups or investigating the unique operation of identity shifting across groups. For example, Black employees face negative stereotypes whereas Asian employees face positive stereotypes based on the model minority myth, which are still harmful (Kim, Block, & Yu, 2021). Does one feel the need to identity shift to avoid or confirm positive stereotypes? What does that behavior look like? What are its implications? Similar questions can be posed for invisible stigmatized identities. Identity shifting may be a helpful way to conceptualize the 101 process of concealing and revealing an identity, particularly considering how the invisible stigmatized identity and the process are built (or not built) into the individuals’ professional identity. Another avenue for rich study is a more thorough foray into the relationship between identity integration, identity shifting, and authenticity. This study used the measure of workplace authenticity at the general level and found that deep shifting was not connected to authenticity. Researchers could consider state vs. trait authenticity as an influence on either identity integration (with differs from the conceptual model) or identity shifting behaviors. Further, one could use the tripartite model of authenticity to study the three parts of authenticity- authentic living, accepting external influence, and self-alienation- in relation to identity shifting. Although the subscales are generally all related to the same variables, Woods and colleagues (2008) found that there are some differences in the way they relate to other constructs. For example, each of the subscales is correlated with happiness but only accepting external influence and self- alienation are correlated with anxiety and stress. The subscales may be differentially related to the identity shifting behaviors or differentially predict outcomes. This information would be useful when making recommendations for how individuals or organizations can decrease the need for identity shifting or increase authenticity. New studies also highlight the importance of relational authenticity. Relational authenticity, such as collective group membership (i.e., race, gender, culture) or role-related identities (e.g., teacher, leader, team member), was found to relate to well-being and withdrawal behaviors over and above individual authenticity (Wessel et al., 2020). Phase II results showed that genuine relationships with coworkers were lacking for individuals that identity shift, perhaps related to a lack of experienced relational authenticity. Collective and role-based authenticity may also serve 102 as a more specific and potentially important measure of authenticity for those with high racial centrality. For instance, a Black employee may find it especially important to experience/express their collective authenticity with their racial group if they have high racial centrality. This may be connected to the ways in which they choose to manage their identity. Relatedly, a recent meta-analysis highlights the relationships between three targets of work identification (team, organization, and profession) and work outcomes (Greco, Porck, Walter, Scrimpshire, & Zabinski, 2021). Identity management research has considered work identification at the profession level, but not as often at the team or organizational level. Connecting identity integration/development with work identification at the team and organizational level may reveal some unique information about how and why individuals with stigmatized identities manage their identities overtime. Finally, a very obvious way to advance the literature would be to expand the research on identity management in different types of work contexts. The COVID-19 pandemic shifted the future of work as more organizations consider allowing large sectors of their populations to choose alternative work arrangements like working remote full time. A large-scale employee survey by The Future Forum (Future Forum, 2021) suggests that virtual work is “leveling the playing field” for minorities. Black employees, particularly, have continually rising employee experience scores while others have plateaued. Researchers interviewed by The Future Forum hypothesize that virtual work has increased belonging and lessened the occurrence of environments where employees feel othered. With the change of face-to-face dynamics, identity management research should be reconsidered within the virtual space. In addition to virtual workers, future identity management research could be applied to populations outside of white- 103 collar knowledge workers such as blue collar jobs, the gig-economy, or even entrepreneurship where the organizational and job characteristics vary greatly. Conclusion This study examined the effects of continual identity management on Black employees through the strategy of identity shifting. I integrated the emotional labor and identity management literatures to conceptualize surface shifting and identity shifting, which parallel the emotional labor strategies of surface acting and deep acting. A conceptual model of identity shifting with antecedents, behaviors, and outcomes was proposed and tested in a mixed methods sequential research design. In Phase I, a cross-sectional survey of Black employees found support for the relationships between identity integration, identity shifting behaviors, and the outcomes of authenticity, well-being, and burnout. There was partial support for the role of job characteristics on identity shifting behaviors. Phase II further contributed to the results using qualitative data gathered through semi-structured interviews. Additional organizational characteristics were identified as antecedents, the perception of identity shifting behaviors was expanded, and other outcomes beyond the intrapersonal were identified. Overall, this research provided support for the study of identity management as a continuous phenomenon and information about the impact of identity shifting on Black employees. The present study also offers some promising future research directions 104 APPENDICES 105 APPENDIX A Phase I Informed Consent 106 A Study on Identity Management at Work Informed Consent What You Will Do: This research aims to understand how Black employees express their identity in the workplace. This study consists of one survey and follow-up interviews. In this survey, you will be asked to provide information about yourself. If you opt-in and are selected for an interview, the questions will ask you to provide additional information about yourself and your experiences. Your Rights to Participant, Say No, or Withdraw: Participation in this online survey is voluntary and greatly appreciated. You may withdraw at any time without penalty. However, you are required to complete the survey with quality responses to receive compensation. You also have the right to request that your responses not be used in the data analyses. Cost and Compensation: There is no cost to you as the participant. The duration of this survey is between 30 minutes to 1 hour. At the completion of this survey, you will receive the option to choose how to be compensated. You may choose to donate your time (receive no compensation), receive a $10 Amazon gift card, or have $10 donated on your behalf to organizations that are fighting for racial equity. The platform ActBlue Charities will be used to donate evenly among 15 organizations including: Justice for All Action Fund, Black Lives Matter Global Network, National Bail Out, Know Your Rights Camp, Black Voters Matter Fund, BYP100, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, The National Police Accountability Project, Color of Change Education Fund, Unicorn Riot, Advancement Project, Higher Heights for America, Fair Fight Action, The Marsha P. Johnson Institute, and The National Black Trans Advocacy Coalition. You may also opt in to participate in a separate interview about your results. If you are selected and participate, you will have the same compensation choices for an hour interview. If the researcher determines that you entered the study under false pretenses (false answers to the screener survey, without taking the screener survey, via a link instead of from the researcher, etc.), or you have not given quality answers, you will not be compensated for your participation. Contact Information for Questions and Concerns: Courtney Bryant, a doctoral candidate in the Department of Psychology at Michigan State University, is conducting this scientific study under the advisement of Dr. Ann Marie Ryan, a professor in the Department of Psychology. If you have questions about the study, contact Courtney Bryant, phone: 734-788-7544, e-mail: bryant27@msu.edu or Ann Marie Ryan, phone: 517-353-8855, e-mail: ryanan@msu.edu. If you have questions or concerns about your role and rights as a research participant, or would like to register a complaint about this study, you may contact, anonymously if you wish, the Michigan State University's Human Research Protection Program by phone: 517-355-2180, fax: 107 517-432-4503, e-mail: irb@msu.edu, or regular mail: 4000 Collins Rd, Suite 136, Lansing, MI 48910. Please indicate that you read the consent form by choosing your participation option below. o I consent to voluntarily participate in this interview o I do not consent to voluntarily participate in this interview 108 APPENDIX B Phase I Measures 109 Burnout The Maslach Burnout Inventory- General Survey (Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter, 1996) The instructions, scale, and items for this survey are proprietary and are not featured in publication. Please contact the researcher for questions. 110 Well-Being Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS; Tennant, et al., 2007) Instructions: Below are some statements about feelings and thoughts. Please tick the box that best describes your experience of each over the last 2 weeks. Scale: 1- None of the time; 2- Rarely; 3- Some of the time; 4- Often; 5- All of the time 1. I’ve been feeling optimistic about the future 2. I’ve been feeling useful 3. I’ve been feeling relaxed 4. I’ve been feeling interested in other people 5. I’ve had energy to spare 6. I’ve been dealing with problems well 7. I’ve been thinking clearly 8. I’ve been feeling good about myself 9. I’ve been feeling close to other people 10. I’ve been feeling confident 11. I’ve been able to make up my own mind about things 12. I’ve been feeling loved 13. I’ve been interested in new things 14. I’ve been feeling cheerful Job Satisfaction Scale: 1- totally disagree; 2- disagree; 3- somewhat disagree; 4- neither agree nor disagree; 5- somewhat agree; 6-agree; 7- totally agree 1. Overall, I am satisfied with my job Work-Related Needs Satisfaction Work-related basic need satisfaction scale (van den Broeck, et al., 2010). Instructions: The following statements aim to tap into your personal experiences at work. Rate your agreement to each item on the scale indicated below. Scale: 1- totally disagree; 2- disagree; 3- neither agree nor disagree; 4- agree; 5- totally agree Relatedness 1. I don’t really feel connected with other people at my job (R). 2. I don’t really mix with other people at my job (R). 3. I often feel alone when I am with my colleagues (R). 4. Some people I work with are close friends of mine. 5. At work, I feel part of a group. 6. At work, I can talk with people about things that really matter to me. 111 Competence 1. I feel competent at my job. 2. I am good at the things I do in my job. 3. I really mater my tasks at my job. 4. I have the feeling that I can even accomplish the most difficult tasks at work. 5. I don’t really feel competent in my job (R). 6. I doubt whether I am able to execute my job properly (R). Autonomy 1. At work, I often feel like I have to follow other people’s commands (R). 2. If I could choose, I would do things at work differently (R). 3. The tasks I have to do at work are in line with what I really want to do. 4. I feel free to do my job the way I think it could best be done. 5. In my job, I feel forced to do things I do not want to do (R). 6. I feel like I can be myself at my job. 112 Authenticity Individual Authenticity Measure at Work scale (IAM Work; van den Bosch & Taris, 2014) Instructions: For the following questions, please focus on your most recent work position when answering the items. Imagine how much each statement applies to you only at work (and not in other situations) for the past 4 weeks. Scale: 1- does not describe me at all through 7- describes me very well 1. I am true to myself at work in most situations 2. At work, I always stand by what I believe in 3. I behave in accordance with my values and beliefs in the workplace 4. I find it easier to get on with people in the workplace when I’m being myself 5. At work, I feel alienated 6. I don’t feel who I truly am at work 7. At work, I feel out of touch with the ‘‘real me’’ 8. In my working environment I feel ‘‘cut off’’ from who I really am 9. At work, I feel the need to do what others expect me to do 10. I am strongly influenced in the workplace by the opinions of others 11. Other people influence me greatly at work 12. At work, I behave in a manner that people expect me to behave 113 Identity Shifting Adapted Version of Emotional Labor Strategy items (Diefendorff, et al., 2005) Scale: 1- strongly disagree; 2- disagree; 3- neither agree nor disagree; 4- agree; 5- strongly agree Surface acting 1. I put on an act in order to deal with others at work 2. I fake a professional identity when interacting with others at work 3. I put on a “show” or “performance” when interacting with others at work 4. I just pretend to be the professional I think I should be for my job 5. I put on a “mask” in order to display the professional image I need for the job 6. I show a professional identity to others at work that is different from who I feel I am inside 7. I fake the professional identity I show when dealing with others at work Deep acting 8. I try to actually be the professional that I must be when interacting with others at work 9. I make an effort to actually be the professional that I need to be toward others at work 10. I work hard to be the professional that I need to show to others at work 11. I work at developing the professional identity inside of me that I need to show to others at work Identity manifestation and suppression (Madera, King, & Hebl, 2012) Instructions: Please indicate your agreement with the below statements regarding your racial/ethnic identity. Scale: 1- strongly disagree; 2- disagree; 3- neither agree nor disagree; 4- agree; 5- strongly agree Manifest group identity 1. I discuss my racial/ethnic identity with my coworkers. 2. I display signs of my racial/ethnic identity in my workspace (e.g., cultural objects). 3. I wear clothes or emblems (e.g., jewelry, pins) that reflect my racial/ethnic identity at work. 4. I celebrate meaningful dates or holidays related to my racial/ethnic identity at work. 5. I talk about my racial/ethnic identity with my supervisor. 6. Everyone I work with knows how important my racial/ethnic identity is to me. 7. I express my racial/ethnic identity at work. 8. I use the language, vernacular, or speech style of my racial/ethnic identity at work. 9. I listen to music associated with my racial/ethnic identity at work. 10. I consume food or drinks associated with my racial/ethnic identity at work. Suppressed group identity 1. I refrain from talking about my racial/ethnic identity with my coworkers. 2. I conceal or camouflage signs of my racial/ethnic identity in my workspace (e.g., cultural objects). 114 3. I hide emblems that would reflect my racial/ethnic identity at work. 4. I try to keep meaningful dates or holidays related to my racial/ethnic identity secret. 5. I try not to talk about my racial/ethnic identity with my supervisor. 6. No one I work with knows how important my racial/ethnic identity is to me. 7. I suppress my racial/ethnic identity at work. 8. I try not to use the language, vernacular, or speech style of my racial/ethnic identity at work. 9. I make a point of not listening to music associated with my racial/ethnic identity at work. 10. I refrain from consuming food or drinks associated with my racial/ethnic identity at work. 115 Identity Integration Adapted version of the Bicultural Identity Integration Scale (Benet-Martinez & Haritatos, 2005) Instructions: Rate your agreement to each item on the scale indicated below. Scale: 1- strongly disagree; 2- disagree; 3- somewhat disagree; 4- neither agree nor disagree; 5- somewhat agree; 6- agree; 7- strongly agree 1. The ideals as a Black person differ from my ideals as a professional (R) 2. I feel conflicted between my identity as a Black person and my identity as a professional (R) 3. I keep everything about being a Black person separate from being a professional (R) 4. I am someone who’s behavior switches from the norms of my race/ethnicity and the norms of my professional training (R) 5. Succeeding as a professional involves the same sides of myself as succeeding as a Black person 6. I feel torn between the expectations of my race/ethnicity and of my career (R) 7. My self-concept seamlessly blends my identity as a professional and as a Black person 8. I do not feel any tension between my goals as a Black person and the goals of my career The Multidimensional Model of Racial Identity (MMRI; Sellers, Shelton, Rowley & Chavous, 1998) Instructions: Read each item and indicate to what degree it reflects your own thoughts and feelings, using the 7-point scale below. There are no right or wrong answers. Base your responses on your opinion at the present time. Centrality Scale 1. Overall, being Black has very little to do with how I feel about myself. (R) 2. In general, being Black is an important part of my self-image. 3. My destiny is tied to the destiny of other Black people. 4. Being Black is unimportant to my sense of what kind of person I am. (R) 5. I have a strong sense of belonging to Black people. 6. I have a strong attachment to other Black people. 7. Being Black is an important reflection of who I am. 8. Being Black is not a major factor in my social relationships. (R) Private Regard Subscale 1. I feel good about Black people. 2. I am happy that I am Black. 3. I feel that Blacks have made major accomplishments and advancements. 116 4. I often regret that I am Black. (R) 5. I am proud to be Black. 6. I feel that the Black community has made valuable contributions to this society. Public Regard Subscale 1. Overall, Blacks are considered good by others. 2. In general, others respect Black people. 3. Most people consider Blacks, on the average, to be more ineffective than other racial groups. (R) 4. Blacks are not respected by the broader society. (R) 5. In general, other groups view Blacks in a positive manner. 6. Society views Black people as an asset. Assimilation Subscale 1. Blacks who espouse separatism are as racist as White people who also espouse separatism. 2. A sign of progress is that Blacks are in the mainstream of America more than ever before. 3. Because America is predominantly White, it is important that Blacks go to White schools so that they can gain experience interacting with Whites. 4. Blacks should strive to be full members of the American political system. 5. Blacks should try to work within the system to achieve their political and economic goals. 6. Blacks should strive to integrate all institutions which are segregated. 7. Blacks should feel free to interact socially with White people. 8. Blacks should view themselves as being Americans first and foremost. 9. The plight of Blacks in America will improve only when Blacks are in important positions within the system. 117 Frequency and Duration of Interactions with Others Frequency of interactions (Adapted from Diefendorff et al., 2005) Scale: 1- strongly disagree; 2- disagree; 3- neither agree nor disagree; 4- agree; 5- strongly agree 1. I interact with many different people (customers, coworkers, etc.) on a daily basis. 2. I do not encounter a large number of interactions with people (customers, coworkers, etc.) during my typical workday. Duration of interactions (Adapted from Diefendorff et al., 2005) Scale: 1- strongly disagree; 2- disagree; 3- neither agree nor disagree; 4- agree; 5- strongly agree 1. I spend a lot of time with each person (customers, coworkers, etc.) I interact with. 2. Most of my interactions with people (customers, coworkers, etc.) are short. 118 Pandemic-Related Measures Perceived Stress Scale (Cohen & Williamson, 1988) Adapted Instructions: The questions in this scale ask you about your feelings and thoughts since the COVID-19 pandemic started. In each case, you will be asked to indicate by circling how often you felt or thought a certain way. Scale: 0 = Never 1 = Almost Never 2 = Sometimes 3 = Fairly Often 4 = Very Often 1. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, how often have you been upset because of something that happened unexpectedly? 2. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, how often have you felt that you were unable to control the important things in your life? 3. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, how often have you felt nervous and “stressed”? 4. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, how often have you felt confident about your ability to handle your personal problems? 5. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, how often have you felt that things were going your way? 6. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, how often have you found that you could not cope with all the things that you had to do? 7. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, how often have you been able to control irritations in your life? 8. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, how often have you felt that you were on top of things? 9. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, how often have you been angered because of things that were outside of your control? 10. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, how often have you felt difficulties were piling up so high that you could not overcome them? 119 Demographics Self-Generated demographic questions What is your current age? (Ex: 34) [Open-Ended] What is your gender? (ex: man, woman, non-binary, transgender woman, etc.) [Open-Ended] What is our race/ethnicity? Please check all that apply. White Non-Hispanic Black/African American Hispanic Latin/A/O/X Asian/Asian American Native American Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Native If not listed, please specify [text box] Which of the following best describes your employers? Private, For-Profit Company or Organization Private, Not For-Profit Organization (including tax-exempt and charitable organizations) Government Please select the category that best describes your job position Entry Level Individual Contributor Experience Individual Contributor Supervisor Mid-level Manager Senior Leader/Director Executive CEO Other (please explain) [text box] The racial composition of the senor leaders in my company can be described as: All or mostly White Slightly more White than non-White Equal numbers of White and non-White Slightly more non-White than White All or mostly non-White Not applicable (please explain) [text box] 120 The racial composition of the location that I work/worked in can be described as: All or mostly Whit Slightly more White than non-White Equal numbers of White and non-White Slightly more non-White than White All or mostly non-White Not applicable (please explain) [text box] The racial composition of my immediate team, group, or department can be described as: All or mostly Whit Slightly more White than non-White Equal numbers of White and non-White Slightly more non-White than White All or mostly non-White Not applicable (please explain) [text box] 121 APPENDIX C Invitation to Participate in Phase II 122 Email Invitation Subject: Invitation to participate: Interview about Black Employee Experiences in the Workplace Hello, Thank you again for participating in my dissertation survey about Black Employee Experiences in the Workplace. You indicated that you would be willing to participate in a follow up interview. If you are still willing or able to do so, please use the scheduling link below set up an interview time. The video conferencing interview will be 1 hour using the Zoom platform (please have your camera on 🙂). You can choose to be compensated $10 via Amazon Gift Card or have $10 donated on your behalf to organizations fighting for racial equity. Please complete the interview consent form before the interview (link in scheduling). Scheduling Link: If you do not wish to participate, please let me know with a reply to this email and I will not contact you again. I truly appreciate your time and consideration! I look forward to (hopefully) speaking with you soon. Best, Courtney Bryant *Email signature* 123 APPENDIX D Phase II Informed Consent 124 A Study on Identity Management at Work Informed Consent What You Will Do: This research aims to understand how Black employees express their identity in the workplace. This study consists of one virtual interview that will be recorded and later transcribed. You will be asked to answer some questions about yourself and how you behave in the workplace. You will be asked to provide your email address below. It is important to note that your email will only be used to connect your interviews to the survey you previously completed, NOT to connect your identity to your answers. Your Rights to Participant, Say No, or Withdraw: Participation in this interview is voluntary and greatly appreciated. If you do not want to answer any of the questions, please feel free to let me know. You can also ask me to stop the interview or the recording at any time. However, you are required to complete the interview to receive compensation. You also have the right to request that your responses not be used in the data analyses. Cost and Compensation: This interview should take approximately 1 hour. You will be compensated $10 via Amazon Gift Cards for the completion of the interview. Contact Information for Questions and Concerns: Courtney Bryant, a doctoral candidate in the Department of Psychology at Michigan State, is conducting this scientific study under the advisement of Dr. Ann Marie Ryan, a professor in the Department of Psychology. If you have questions about the study, contact Courtney Bryant, phone: 734-788-7544, e-mail: bryant27@msu.edu or Ann Marie Ryan, phone: 517-353-8855, e-mail: ryanan@msu.edu. If you have questions or concerns about your role and rights as a research participant, or would like to register a complaint about this study, you may contact, anonymously if you wish, the Michigan State University's Human Research Protection Program by phone: 517-355-2180, fax: 517-432-4503, e-mail: irb@msu.edu, or regular mail: 4000 Collins Rd, Suite 136, Lansing, MI 48910. Please choose the option below to consent to voluntary participation in the study interview. o I consent to voluntarily participate in this interview o I do not consent to voluntarily participate in this interview Please fill out the information below so that I can connect your consent form to our interview. First Name Email Address Please indicate your preferred compensation. 125 o $10 Amazon gift card Redemption code will be sent to the email address used for this study within 7-10 business days o Donate $20 on your behalf to organizations fighting for racial equity The donation will be split evenly among 15 organizations including: Justice for All Action Fund, Black Lives Matter Global Network, National Bail Out, Know Your Rights Camp, Black Voters Matter Fund, BYP100, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, The National Police Accountability Project, Color of Change Education Fund, Unicorn Riot, Advancement Project, Higher Heights for America, Fair Fight Action, The Marsha P. Johnson Institute, and The National Black Trans Advocacy Coalition. o Donate your time (no compensation) The donation of time will enable the researcher to collect more data Thank you for completing this form! If you haven’t already, please be sure to schedule the interview using the link in the email sent to you. 126 APPENDIX E Phase II Interview Protocol 127 Interview Protocol Pre-Interview 1. 1 week before: send reminder email and link to Informed Consent (via Qualtrics link) 2. 1 day before: send reminder email, ensure that participant has completed Informed Consent survey (if not, send it again) Interview 1. 10-15 minutes before scheduled interview: 1. Open Zoom 2. Prepare the introductory presentation Interview Script Introduction Thank you again for taking the time to meet with me! If it’s ok with you, I’ll start recording the meeting now. (Turn on recorder) Again, my name is Courtney Bryant and I am a doctoral candidate at Michigan State University’s Organizational Psychology Program. This is my dissertation research and I am interested in understanding more about Black employee experiences in the workplace. Later, I will connect your interview answers to your demographic information but to get us started, could you tell me a little about yourself? Your name, what you do, and how long you’ve been in your current role. Can you describe a typical day at your job? How is your day structured? Who do you interact with? What do you tend to do after work ends? Thank you for that information. I am going to start the “official” interview questions now. My research is about a phenomenon called identity shifting where people, especially minorities, change the way they act in the workplace in order to assimilate and avoid stereotypes. Minorities may switch between the way they act in the workplace and what they consider their racial norms. You may have heard this be called code-switching in popular culture. My questions today are about how you may or may not engage in identity shifting or code-switching. Pre-question: Given the definition, do you identity shift at work? If Yes… 1. How do you change yourself at work? a. Can you think of some examples? b. Can you explain how these are different from how you would describe yourself in your racial community? 2. Why do you think you change aspects of yourself with others at work? 128 a. More context/examples: childhood upbringing, past experiences, individual characteristics, societal norms, avoid stereotypes/discrimination, receive higher pay, or anything else 3. What factors in your work environment lead you to change aspects of yourself with others? a. Probe if needed: Are there only certain people you do this with? If so, what is it about those people that make you change yourself? Are there particularly events at work in which you engage in this behavior? If so, why do you think that is? 4. How do you think changing yourself at work affects you? Why? a. Personally? b. Professionally? c. Interpersonally? d. More context/examples: how does it affect your well-being, job satisfaction, happiness, physical experiences, career trajectory, workplace network, relationships at home, etc.? 5. (If there is time) How do others react to you when you change yourself at work compared to when you do not? a. How do you think their reactions affect you? If No… 1. What enables you to be authentic at work? a. Alternative question: Why do you think you are able to be yourself at work? 2. Why do you think others, especially minorities or Black people, feel they have to change themselves at work? a. Why do you think it’s different for you? 3. What are the implications of being authentic at work for you? a. What are the benefits of being authentic? b. Professionally Closing Thank you for sharing your experience and perspective with me today. Is there anything else that you would like to share about this topic? Are there any questions that I should ask to better understand how identity shifting affect Black people’s experiences in the workplace? Do you have any questions for me? Thank you very much for your thoughtful input. You’ve been extremely helpful. 129 APPENDIX F Tables 130 Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, Alpha Coefficients, and Bivariate Correlations of Measures Mean (SD) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 Gender (F/M) .38(.49) - 2 Age 39.28(11.92 -.06 - ) 3 Perceived Stress Scale 2.79(.65) -.05 -.32** (.81) 4 Job Position 3.14(1.81) .10 .25** -.04 - 5 Sen. Lead Race Comp. 2.03(1.17) .13* .06 .05 .20** - 6 Workpl. Race Comp. 2.46(1.28) .07 -.05 -.09 .07 .54** - 7 Exhaustion 2.72(1.66) -.01 -.24** .47** -.16** -.14* -.15* (.93) 8 Cynicism 2.48(1.51) .06 -.32** .45** -.17** -.07 -.13* .69** (.84) 9 Professional Efficacy 4.43(1.28) -.16** .23** -.17** .06 -.08 -.09 -.04 -.20** (.86) 10 WEMWBS 49.82(9.51) .13* .15** -.39** .09 .11 .07 -.37** -.35** .41** (.92) 11 Work-Needs Sat. 3.55(.63) -.01 .27** -.40** .26** .12 .10 -.55** -.61** .48** .54** (.87) 12 Relatedness 3.4(.9) .12 .18** -.28** .26** .16** .11 -.38** -.43** .31** .45** .84** (.84) 13 Competence 4.06(.72) -.19** .22** -.31** .05 -.06 -.01 -.29** -.39** .62** .42** .70** .37** (.83) 14 Autonomy 3.2(.79) .03 .24** -.36** .27** .15** .11 -.62** -.62** .22** .39** .80** .54** .34** 15 IAMWORK 4.86(1.16) -.13* .38** -.41** .14* .05 .05 -.45** -.51** .45** .32** .67** .51** .54** 16 Surface Shifting 2.65(1.11) .11 -.43** .36** -.18** -.05 .01 .39** .41** -.34** -.21** -.54** -.42** -.40** 17 Deep Shifting 3.71(.86) .05 -.12* .02 -.04 .04 .03 .07 .08 .19** .21** .04 .05 .14* 18 Manifesting 3.24(.85) .01 .00 -.02 .06 .01 -.12* .00 -.02 .13* .21** .21** .19** .15* 19 Suppression 2.57(.94) .20** -.22** .19** -.10 .00 .09 .21** .31** -.36** -.12* -.42** -.28** -.41** 20 Identity Integration 4.73(1.23) -.13* .29** -.35** .09 -.02 -.04 -.16** -.25** .31** .15* .37** .21** .39** 21 Centrality 5.33(1.07) -.18** -.18** .03 -.11 -.23** -.12* .09 .01 .30** .08 .12 .03 .35** 22 Private Regard 6.2(.92) -.25** .01 -.14* -.01 -.20** -.12* -.01 -.13* .48** .26** .32** .22** .49** 23 Public Regard 3.31(1.2) .32** -.02 -.11 .10 .19** .13* -.15* -.09 -.13* .23** .15* .14* -.07 25 Assimilation 4.72(1.08) .27** .06 -.18** .02 .14* .23** -.14* -.05 .01 .31** .19** .21** .02 25 Frequency 3.74(1.02) -.06 .16** -.04 .20** -.02 -.18** -.08 -.15* .26** .11 .26** .21** .25** 26 Duration 3.09(.94) .05 .19** -.02 .16** .13* -.15* -.04 -.18** .23** .20** .20** .20** .14* 131 Table 1 (cont’d) Mean 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 (SD) 14 Autonomy 3.2(.79) (.76) 15 IAMWORK 4.86(1.16) .55** (.88) 16 Surface Shifting 2.65(1.11) -.44** -.80** (.92) 17 Deep Shifting 3.71(.86) -.10 -.20** .31** (.77) 18 Manifesting 3.24(.85) .14* .15* -.02 0.09 (.88) 19 Suppression 2.57(.94) -.31** -.64** .61** .22** -.29** (.90) 20 Identity Integration 4.73(1.23) .29** .60** -.58** -.20** .24** -.62** (.82) 21 Centrality 5.33(1.07) -.08 .12* -.05 .20** .15* -.25** .18** (.79) 22 Private Regard 6.2(.92) .08 .36** -.28** .20** .10 -.34** .36** .60** (.86) 23 Public Regard 3.31(1.2) .26** -.04 .10 -0.05 .19** .15* -.07 -.30** -.22** (.80) 24 Assimilation 4.72(1.08) .21** 0.02 .05 .17** -.05 .27** -.07 -.20** .01 .40** (.82) 25 Frequency 3.74(1.02) .16** .25** -.25** 0.00 .09 -.33** .23** .15* .19** -.09 -.07 (.67) 26 Duration 3.09(.94) .13* .20** -.16** 0.11 .16** -.22** .14* .12* .16** -.01 -.04 .48** (.62) Note. Sen. Lead Race Comp. = Senior Leader Racial Composition; Workpl. Race Comp. = Workplace Racial Composition; WEMWBS = Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale; Work-Needs Sat. = Work-Needs Satisfaction; IAMWORK = Individual Authenticity Measure at Work scale. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 132 Table 2 Confirmatory Factor Analyses of Surface Shifting and Deep Shifting Model  df RMSEA SRMR TLI CFI Model 1 155.761* 43 .096* .063 .929 .909 Model 2 95.214* 41 .068* .058 .954 .966 Note. RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation; SRMR, standardized root mean squared residual; TLI, Tucker–Lewis index; CFI, comparative fit index. * Significant at p<0.005. 133 Table 3 Hypothesis H1a: Regressing Identity Integration Onto Surface Shifting Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .421 10.54 Gender .05 .11 1.08 Perceived Stress Scale .19** .09 3.75 Frequency -.09 .06 -1.55 Duration -.03 .06 -.53 Job Position -.11* .03 -2.35 Identity Integration -.48** .05 -9.24 Model 1 R2 = .22; Model 2 R2 = .40 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 134 Table 4 Hypothesis H1b: Regressing Identity Integration Onto Deep Shifting Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .41 10.83 Gender .01 .11 .21 Perceived Stress Scale -.07 .08 -1.04 Frequency -.00 .06 -.07 Duration .14* .06 2.06 Job Position -.05 .03 -.78 Identity Integration -.24** .05 -3.61 Model 1 R2 = .02 Model 2 R2 = .06 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 135 Table 5 Hypothesis H2a: Regressing the Frequency of Interacting With Others Onto Surface Shifting Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .45 10.03 Duration -.02 .06 -.43 Perceived Stress Scale .18** .09 3.63 Job position -.11* .03 -2.22 Identity Integration -.49** .05 -9.45 Racial Composition of .00 .04 .14 Workplace Frequency -.09 .06 -1.59 Model 1 R2 = .39 Model 2 R2 = .40 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 136 Table 6 Hypothesis H2b: Regressing the Duration of Interacting With Others Onto Surface Shifting Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .45 9.94 Job Position -.10* .03 -2.03 Identity Integration -.49** .05 -9.44 Perceived Stress Scale .19** .09 3.71 Racial Composition of -.06 .06 -.96 Senior Leaders Racial Composition of .04 .05 .65 Workplace Frequency -.09 .06 -1.64 Duration -.01 .07 -.20 Model 1 R2 = .40 Model 2 R2 = .40 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 137 Table 7 Hypothesis H2c: Regressing the Frequency of Interacting With Others Onto Deep Shifting Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .43 10.07 Perceived Stress Scale -.09 .08 -1.05 Job Position -.02 .03 -.77 Identity Integration -.16** .05 -3.62 Racial Composition of .02 .04 .40 Workplace Duration .13* .06 2.10 Frequency -.00 .06 -.03 Model 1 R2 = .06 Model 2 R2 = .06 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 138 Table 8 Hypothesis H2d: Regressing the Duration of Interacting With Others Onto Deep Shifting Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .44 10.02 Job Position -.05 .03 -.73 Identity Integration -.23** .05 -3.61 Perceived Stress Scale -.07 .09 -1.02 Racial Composition of -.01 .06 -.17 Senior Leaders Racial Composition of .03 .05 .43 Workplace Frequency -.00 .06 -.04 Duration .15* .06 2.08 Model 1 R2 = .05 Model 2 R2 = .06 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 139 Table 9 Hypothesis H2e: Regressing the Frequency of Interacting With Others Onto Burnout (Emotional Exhaustion, Cynicism, Professional Efficacy) Model  St. error t value Exhaustion (Intercept) .63 -2.32 Job Position -.04 .04 -.98 Identity Integration .04 .06 .95 Perceived Stress Scale .24 .13 4.85 Racial Composition of -.10 .08 -1.92 Senior Leaders Racial Composition of .03 .07 .62 Workplace Duration .10 .09 1.90 Cynicism .61 .05 12.64 Professional Efficacy .12 .06 2.35 Frequency -.05 .08 -1.01 Model 1 R2 = .53 Model 2 R2 = .54 Cynicism (Intercept) .56 3.83 Job Position -.03 .04 -.71 Identity Integration -.06 .06 -1.22 Perceived Stress Scale .11* .12 2.25 Racial Composition of -.07 .05 -1.57 Workplace Duration -.13* .08 -2.61 Professional Efficacy -.13* .05 -2.77 Exhaustion .60** .04 12.57 Frequency .00 .07 .038 Model 1 R2 = .54 Model 2 R2 = .54 140 Table 9 (cont’d) Model  St. error t value Professional Efficacy (Intercept) .62 5.00 Job Position -.00 .04 -.05 Identity Integration .22** .06 3.55 Perceived Stress Scale -.09 .13 -1.41 Racial Composition of -.06 .06 -1.10 Workplace Duration .11 .09 1.70 Exhaustion .20* .06 2.51 Cynicism -.22** .07 -2.77 Frequency .12 .08 1.78 Model 1 R2 = .18 Model 2 R2 = .19 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 141 Table 10 Hypothesis H2f: Regressing the Duration of Interacting With Others Onto Burnout (Emotional Exhaustion, Cynicism, Professional Efficacy) Model  St. error t value Exhaustion (Intercept) .63 -2.32 Job Position -.04 .04 -.98 Identity Integration .04 .06 .95 Perceived Stress Scale .24** .127 4.85 Racial Composition of -.10 .08 -1.92 Senior Leaders Racial Composition of .03 .07 .62 Workplace Frequency -.05 .08 -1.01 Cynicism .61** .05 12.64 Professional Efficacy .11* .06 2.35 Duration .10 .09 1.90 Model 1 R2 = .53 Model 2 R2 = .54 Cynicism (Intercept) .56 3.89 Job Position -.04 .04 -.88 Identity Integration -.06 .06 -1.26 Perceived Stress Scale .10* .12 2.08 Racial Composition of .06 .07 1.20 Senior Leaders Racial Composition of -.10* .06 -1.97 Workplace Frequency .01 .07 .10 Professional Efficacy -.12* .05 -2.67 Exhaustion .61** .04 12.64 Duration -.14* .08 -2.83 Model 1 R2 = .53 Model 2 R2 = .54 142 Table 10 (cont’d) Model  St. error t value Professional Efficacy (Intercept) .62 4.89 Job Position .01 .04 .12 Identity Integration .22** .06 3.57 Perceived Stress Scale -.09 .13 -1.26 Racial Composition of -.08 .078 -1.12 Senior Leaders Racial Composition of -.02 .07 -.30 Workplace Frequency .11 .08 1.71 Exhaustion .19* .06 2.35 Cynicism -.21* .07 -2.67 Duration .13 .09 1.92 Model 1 R2 = .18 Model 2 R2 = .19 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 143 Table 11 Hypothesis H3a: Regressing Surface Shifting Onto Emotional Exhaustion Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .75 -3.25 Job Position -.03 .04 -.69 Identity Integration .19 .07 2.26 Perceived Stress Scale .22** .13 4.43 Racial Composition of -.08 .07 -1.65 Senior Leaders Racial Composition of .02 .07 .41 Workplace Frequency -.04 .08 -.78 Duration .09 .09 1.87 Deep Shifting -.05 .09 -1.07 Cynicism .57** .05 11.64 Professional Efficacy .15** .06 3.04 Surface Shifting .20** .09 3.42 Model 1 R2 = .54 Model 2 R2 = .56 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 144 Table 12 Hypothesis H3b: Regressing Surface Shifting Onto Cynicism Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .69 2.05 Job Position -.02 .04 -.56 Identity Integration -.02 .07 -.28 Perceived Stress Scale .11* .12 2.26 Racial Composition of -.07 .05 -1.65 Workplace Frequency .01 .07 .13 Duration -.13* .08 -2.70 Deep Shifting .05 .08 .97 Professional Efficacy -.13* .06 -2.64 Exhaustion .58** .05 11.57 Surface Shifting .06 .08 1.02 Model 1 R2 = .55 Model 2 R2 = .55 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 145 Table 13 Hypothesis H3c: Regressing Surface Shifting Onto Professional Efficacy Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .72 3.73 Job Position -.02 .04 -.29 Identity Integration .13* .07 1.99 Perceived Stress Scale -.04 .13 -.70 Racial Composition of -.06 .05 -1.13 Workplace Frequency .09 .08 1.51 Duration .06 .08 1.00 Deep Shifting .31** .08 5.60 Exhaustion .24** .06 3.22 Cynicism -.20* .06 -2.64 Surface Shifting -.32** .08 -4.44 Model 1 R2 = .24 Model 2 R2 = .29 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 146 Table 14 Hypothesis H3d: Regressing Surface Shifting Onto Authenticity Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .41 15.20 Gender -.04 .08 -1.25 Job Position -.00 .02 -.02 Identity Integration .17** .04 4.00 Perceived Stress Scale -.13** .07 -3.46 Frequency .01 .05 .17 Duration .07 .05 1.67 Deep Shifting .02 .05 .65 Surface Shifting -.65** .05 -14.14 Model 1 R2 = .46 Model 2 R2 = .69 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 147 Table 15 Hypothesis H4: Regressing Deep Shifting Onto Authenticity Model  St. error t value (Intercept) .41 15.20 Gender -.04 .08 -1.25 Job Position -.00 .02 -.02 Identity Integration .17** .04 4.00 Perceived Stress Scale -.13** .07 -3.46 Frequency .01 .05 .17 Duration .07 .05 1.67 Surface Shifting -.65** .05 -14.14 Deep Shifting .02 .05 .65 Model 1 R2 = .69 Model 2 R2 = .69 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 148 Table 16 Hypothesis H5a: Regressing Authenticity Onto Well-Being Using the WEMWBS Scale as the Well-Being Measure Model  St. error t value (Intercept) 1.06 2.18 Gender .12* .29 .44 Job Position .02 .53 -1.13 Identity Integration -.08 .87 -5.10 Perceived Stress Scale -.30** .41 .44 Racial Composition of .02 .58 -.02 Workplace Frequency -.00 .62 2.04 Duration .12* .79 .33 Surface Shifting .03 .62 4.05 Deep Shifting .23** .78 3.11 Authenticity .29** 1.06 2.18 Model 1 R2 = .26 Model 2 R2 = .28 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 149 Table 17 Hypothesis H5a: Regressing Authenticity Onto Well-Being Using the One-Item Job Satisfaction Question Model  St. error t value (Intercept) 1.13 2.30 Gender .13* .17 1.11 Job Position .06 .05 -2.40 Identity Integration -.17* .09 -1.92 Perceived Stress Scale -.12 .14 .99 Racial Composition of .06 .06 -1.37 Workplace Frequency -.09 .09 1.90 Duration .12 .10 -.44 Surface Shifting -.04 .13 2.67 Deep Shifting .16* .10 3.94 Authenticity .39** .12 2.30 Model 1 R2 = .18 Model 2 R2 = .22 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 150 Table 18 Hypothesis H5a: Regressing Authenticity Onto Well-Being Using the Work-Related Needs Satisfaction Scale Model  St. error t value Composite (Intercept) .38 4.17 Gender .05 .06 1.06 Job Position .14* .02 3.29 Identity Integration -.08 .03 -1.43 Perceived Stress Scale -.14** .05 -2.95 Racial Composition of .06 .02 1.31 Workplace Frequency .09 .03 1.75 Duration .00 .03 .08 Surface Shifting -.03 .04 -.40 Deep Shifting .16** .03 3.57 Authenticity .64** .04 8.47 Model 1 R2 = .42 Model 2 R2 = .54 Competence (Intercept) .50 3.26 Gender -.12* .07 -2.44 Job Position -.02 .02 -.31 Identity Integration .10 .04 1.58 Perceived Stress Scale -.09 .06 -1.57 Racial Composition of -.01 .03 -.29 Workplace Frequency .12* .04 2.16 Duration -.05 .04 -.90 Surface Shifting .02 .06 .29 Deep Shifting .26** .04 5.13 Authenticity .48** .05 5.56 Model 1 R2 = .33 Model 2 R2 = .40 151 Table 18 (cont’d) Model  St. error t value Relatedness (Intercept) .63 2.29 Gender .14* .09 2.69 Job Position .14* .03 2.76 Identity Integration -.16* .05 -2.47 Perceived Stress Scale -.10 .08 -1.78 Racial Composition of .05 .05 .77 Senior Leaders Racial Composition of .04 .04 .65 Workplace Frequency .06 .05 1.03 Duration .04 .06 .71 Surface Shifting -.11 .07 -1.26 Deep Shifting .14** .05 2.65 Authenticity .47** .07 5.37 Model 1 R2 = .31 Model 2 R2 = .37 Autonomy (Intercept) .54 3.13 Gender .05 .08 1.02 Job Position .17** .02 3.42 Identity Integration -.09 .04 -1.49 Perceived Stress Scale -.16** .07 -2.91 Racial Composition of .10 .04 1.64 Senior Leaders Racial Composition of .02 .04 .31 Workplace Frequency .04 .04 .73 Duration -.03 .05 -.51 Surface Shifting .04 .06 .49 Deep Shifting -.02 .05 -.31 Authenticity .55** .06 6.29 Model 1 R2 = .30 Model 2 R2 = .39 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 152 Table 19 Regressing Authenticity onto Burnout (Emotional Exhaustion, Cynicism, Professional Efficacy) Model  St. error t value Exhaustion (Intercept) .98 -.70 Gender -.02 .15 -.46 Job Position -.03 .04 -.75 Identity Integration .15* .07 2.80 Perceived Stress Scale .20** .13 4.10 Racial Composition of -.08 .07 -1.63 Senior Leaders Racial Composition of .03 .07 .60 workplace Frequency -.04 .08 -.80 Duration .10* .09 2.04 Surface Shifting .08 .11 1.16 Deep Shifting -.05 .09 -1.18 Cynicism .54** .06 10.56 Professional Efficacy .18** .06 3.62 Authenticity -.21** .12 -2.67 Model 1 R2 = .56 Model 2 R2 = .57 Cynicism (Intercept) .89 2.82 Gender .07 .13 1.56 Job Position -.04 .04 -.83 Identity Integration .02 .07 .41 Perceived Stress Scale .12* .12 2.31 Racial Composition of -.07 .05 -1.58 workplace Frequency .01 .07 .16 Duration -.13* .08 -2.67 Surface Shifting -.03 .10 -.47 Deep Shifting .03 .08 .75 Professional Efficacy -.08 .06 -1.57 Exhaustion .55** .05 10.51 Authenticity -.18* .11 -2.20 Model 1 R2 = .55 Model 2 R2 = .56 153 Table 19 (cont’d) Model  St. error t value Professional Efficacy (Intercept) .91 -.33 Gender -.09 .13 -1.80 Job Position .01 .04 .19 Identity Integration .02 .07 .26 Perceived Stress Scale -.04 .12 -.61 Racial Composition of -.07 .05 -1.40 workplace Frequency .08 .07 1.31 Duration .05 .08 .85 Surface Shifting -.03 .10 -.35 Deep Shifting .29** .08 5.61 Cynicism -.11 .06 -1.57 Exhaustion .27** .06 3.77 Authenticity .49** .10 5.31 Model 1 R2 = .30 Model 2 R2 = .37 Note. Model 1 represents all the variables in the model except for the independent variable of focus. Model 2 represents all the variables in the model.  represents the standardized regression coefficients. * Significant at p<0.05. ** Significant at p<.005 154 Table 20 Codes, Frequencies, and Exemplar Quotes First Level Second Level % Exemplar Quotes Code Codes “I would definitely say the majority of my code switching can be identified, felt or Language pinpointed in vernacular in the language choice that I use. And I would say that it's a bit 83.3% beyond just using proper grammar… But even tone of voice, posture, over exaggerated facial expressions to ingratiate others from the majority and let them know, yes, I'm safe.” “I definitely try to make sure that I'm always presenting myself in a professional manner and, you know, that can come down to what I'm wearing or even my hair styles. So, you know, sometimes I might think that I want to have a certain hairstyle, but then I have to Appearance 61.1% think about going into work and how people may perceive me in that way. And it may deter me from actually, you know pursuing, getting that type of hairstyle or even wearing certain outfits that I see other people get away with, that I know that it would probably be an issue if I came to work in that attire.” How “My humor would not work in the corporate environment. It's not inappropriate, but I think there's a lot of cultural references that I would want to say, but I don't think anyone Personality would necessarily get… So, I think the perception, actually I know the perception of me 27.8% to my colleagues is that I'm probably kind of stoic and just like not very humorous and outgoing person. And anyone outside of work would say that I'm probably the opposite, and like uber goofy and outgoing. But I wouldn't say I'm like that at work at all.” “…you see how open and honest I can be about the things that I'm going through. I'm very transparent. I don't have too many secrets and things that I feel like I just can't tell Self- people. But coming to work in the environment that I'm in and just the type of people I've disclosure 44.4% had to interact with- freely using profanity in the office and telling all their business and everything- I cut that aspect of my personality out, because I don't feel like if I can do it and it be received the same way.” 155 Table 20 (cont’d) “It’s definitely necessary like pretty soon I'm going to need letters of recommendation. And I'm going to need to keep this job PRNa while I go to grad school, things like that. So Professional 50.0% I feel like one little thing could just turn a person off... And my career goal is like really, success really important to me, like I sacrifice a lot. So I wouldn’t want- and it sounds so bad- that I wouldn't want my real self to get in the way of that. But that's just how it is.” “Just to fit in, to be accepted. There's a [possibility] for being likable. Even though people To fit in 38.9% say about its how hard you work to get promoted and stuff, it’s also about who likes you and, you know, if you can be assimilated.” Why “Growing up my mom, and this is going to mean something, but my mom was a Generational receptionist. And one thing that she always wanted us to do was to learn how to speak safety 22.2% proper English. She always said you can speak however you want to at home, but her practices generation was conditioned to believe that you had to speak a certain way to be employable.” “I think that people would not take me seriously. I think that I would be you know passed Fear of being over for opportunities, particularly opportunities in leadership. I think that people would judged/ 33.3% put me into like the stereotype buckets of saying like, “oh, she's difficult to work with or stereotyped oh, she's aggressive or oh, she's angry.” And I just think that, while code switching is very exhausting it's also a means of survival, particularly in the workplace.” a PRN is a term in the medical field that stands for pro re nata, that means as needed. A PRN employee has the freedom to choose shifts. 156 Table 20 (cont’d) “I definitely think that it puts almost a silent, I think over time, you think you don't feel it anymore, but it's always an additional weight. Within the workplace, there's like a double filter that everything has to go through before you even open your mouth to speak… And Personal 55.6% I think that that weight that I just talked about in the previous question is an inherent consequence for anybody who code switches because having that extra layer of cognitive dissonance before you approach anything or even open your mouth in a room full of white people, it automatically sets you up as a disadvantage.” “I feel like it makes people more comfortable with you. I find that I often take on to make other people comfortable because I understand those perceptions or stereotype. Like professionally it makes people more comfortable. And then that translates into when Professional 55.6% people can trust you, that opens up more opportunities. And so, I think that that's part of Effects the yeah, it just kind of makes you more comfortable with you as you're going to do the right thing or you know, what you're doing, so all of these things opened up more doors professionally.” “‘Cuz sometimes I wonder it's like, dang are we really friends? Because I can't bring my, like they don't know [Me] fully. Like they know, I would say about 70% of [Me]. Sure. It's not so drastic that that I would say that they wouldn't know me at all. But my friends know me and they know me fully. And even when I make mistakes or even when I'm just Interpersonal 50.0% being a jerk or whatever, they would know me. Whereas these people only know a portion of me. They know, my presentation, they know my representative, my facade, my superficies, you know, they don't know me fully. And I wonder about that. And it's like, could we be cool outside of this? If there was not a specific location or a domain where we had to interact, would we even want to know each other fully, fully?” 157 Table 20 (cont’d) “Yeah, we have an openly gay CEO now but has never actually advocated for LGBTQ rights, he has only advocated for Black people and their inclusion at work… He’s been a Company really good champion of saying it how it’s like… He’s just been so honest and passionate 27.8% leaders about it and I, I think it’s a good example of how to use leadership platform and privileges to change organizations. I feel like the more he’s harping about this, the more people have started talking about this.” “I think that it's just the whole standard of, you know, working in like an environment like ours, which is predominantly white, where I think maybe some folks of color may have to like, adhere to their standard of what these folks’ standards are. Which is one of the reasons why maybe some people feel as if they have to code switch. So like an example, I mean, I don't have, you know, dreads, but maybe an individual who thought about, you know what, I want to, I want to, I want to grow dreads. But I can't really do it because I'm in this work Culture 27.8% environment that doesn't necessarily, you know, or isn't accepting of that. So maybe that's one of the reasons why I may have to code switch or I may have to adhere to this, this standard because one, I want to progress in this department or in this area, I want to be Organizational accepted. So in order for me to do that, I need to make sure that I'm in line with whatever, Influences whatever identity or whatever standard that's within that environment and not necessarily interject too much of my identity. Because if I interject too much of my identity, I may jeopardize my ability to progress and people may look at me in a certain way.” “Ok, so I would say that what leads me to code switch would definitely be lack of diversity. So if you are in a room and you're literally the only person in the room who's not one way, like just to give an example, you know, there's a lot of, I guess, you know, 30-something blonde White women who work on the floor that I work on and they all like chitchat and talk and it's very hard to, you know, not be in that demographic and like try to relate to Demo- them, but you're so different from them so then you try to find what little things you might 44.4% graphics have in common. So I would say definitely lack of diversity. Like if there were more people, not even necessarily more Black people, but just more people of color or, you know, people from different backgrounds. Um, even as it comes to like disability or, you know, LGBTQ, like that sort of thing. I may feel more comfortable being myself for expressing my true opinions about things versus it just being one big homogenous environment and me feeling like I'm constantly the other.” 158 REFERENCES 159 REFERENCES Anicich, E. M., & Hirsh, J. B. (2017). The psychology of middle power: Vertical code- switching, role conflict, and behavioral inhibition. Academy of Management Review, 42(4), 659-682. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0002 Ali, A. A., Lyons, B. J., & Ryan, A. M. (2017). Managing a Perilous Stigma: Ex-Offenders’ Use of Reparative Impression Management Tactics in Hiring Contexts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(9) 1271-1285. Ashforth, B. E., Harrison, S. H., & Corley, K. G. (2008). Identification in organizations: An examination of four fundamental questions. Journal of management, 34(3), 325-374. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0149206308316059 Ashforth, B. E., & Humphrey, R. H. (1993). Emotional labor in service roles: The influence of identity. The Academy of Management Review, 18(1), 88-115. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.2307/258824 Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2002). Validation of the Maslach Burnout Inventory--General Survey: An internet study. Anxiety, Stress & Coping: An International Journal, 15(3), 245-260. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1080/1061580021000020716 Beilock, S. L., Rydell, R. J., & McConnell, A. R. (2007). Stereotype threat and working memory: Mechanisms, alleviation, and spillover. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(2), 256–276. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.136.2.256 Bell, E. L. (1990). The bicultural life experience of career‐oriented black women. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11(6), 459-477. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030110607 Bell, E. L. J., & Nkomo, S. M. (2001). Our separate ways: Black and White women and the struggle for professional identity. Boston: Harvard University Press. Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219-234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475 Berry, J. W. (1990). Psychology of acculturation. In N. R. Goldberger & J. B. Veroff (Eds.), The culture and psychology reader (pp. 457–488). New York: New York University Press. Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S., (2004). Are Emily and George more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. American Economic Review, 94 (4); 991-1013. 160 Benet‐Martínez, V., & Haritatos, J. (2005). Bicultural identity integration (BII): Components and psychosocial antecedents. Journal of Personality, 73(4), 1015-1050. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00337.x Benet-Martínez, V., Leu, J., Lee, F., & Morris, M. W. (2002). Negotiating biculturalism: Cultural frame switching in biculturals with oppositional versus compatible cultural identities. Journal of Cross-cultural psychology, 33(5), 492-516. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022022102033005005 Bhatt, R. M. (2008). In other words: Language mixing, identity representations, and third space 1. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(2), 177-200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 9841.2008.00363.x Bhattacharyya, B., Bryan, C., & Lyons, B.J., (2019). Emotional labor and people of colors’ management of stigmatized attributes. Paper presented at 79th Meeting of the Academy of Management. Boston, MA. Bhave D. P., & Glomb, T. M. (2016). The role of occupational emotional labor requirements on the surface acting–job satisfaction relationship. Journal of Management, 42(30), 722-741. Bolino, M., Long, D., & Turnley, W. (2016). Impression management in organizations: Critical questions, answers, and areas for future research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3, 377-406. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1059601103257417 Bono, J. E., & Vey, M. A. (2005). Toward understanding emotional management at work: A quantitative review of emotional labor research. In C. E. Härtel, W. J. Zerbe, & N. M. Ashkanasy (Eds.), Emotions in organizational behavior (p. 213–233). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Braga, G. (1983). Comment on Breitborde, L. B. in: International Journal of the Sociology of Language, (39), 45-55. Breitborde, L. B. (1983). Rebuttal essay. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, (39), 161-177. Brewer, G. A. (2005). In the eye of the storm: Frontline supervisors and federal agency performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 505–527. Brook, A. T., Garcia, J., & Fleming, M. (2008). The effects of multiple identities on psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(12), 1588- 1600. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208324629 Brotheridge, C. M, & Grandey, A. A. (2002). Emotional labor and burnout: Comparing two perspectives of "people work". Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60(1), 17-39. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1815 161 Brotheridge, C. M., & Lee, R. T. (2003). Development and validation of the Emotional Labour Scale. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 365–79. Buckner, S. (2005) Taking the debate on reflexivity further. Journal of Social Work Practice 19, 59–72. Button, S. B. (2004). Identity management strategies utilized by lesbian and gay employees: A quantitative investigation. Group & Organization Management, 29(4), 470-494.taub Carbado, D. W., & Gulati, M. (2013). Acting White? Rethinking Race in “Post-Racial” America. New York: Oxford University Press. Capers, K. J., & Smith, C. W. (2016). Straddling identities: identity cross-pressures on Black immigrants’ policy preferences. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 4(3), 393-424. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2015.1112823 Cassell, C., & Walsh, S. (1997). II. Organizational Psychology: Research/Practice: Organizational Cultures, Gender Management Strategies and Women's Experience of Work. Feminism & Psychology, 7(2), 224-230. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0959353597072006 Cha, S. E., Hewlin, P. F., Roberts, L. M., Buckman, B. R., Leroy, H., Steckler, E. L., Ostermeier, K., Cooper, D. (2019). Being Your True Self at Work: Integrating the Fragmented Research on Authenticity in Organizations. Academy of Management Annals 13(2), 633- 671. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0108 Chaudoir, S. R., & Fisher, J. D. (2010). The disclosure processes model: Understanding disclosure decision making and post disclosure outcomes among people living with a concealable stigmatized identity. Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 236. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0018193 Clair, J. A., Beatty, J. E., & Maclean, T. L. (2005). Out of sight but not out of mind: Managing invisible social identities in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 78- 95. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2005.15281431 Chen, S. X., Benet‐Martínez, V., & Harris Bond, M. (2008). Bicultural Identity, bilingualism, and psychological adjustment in multicultural societies: Immigration‐based and globalization‐based acculturation. Journal of Personality, 76(4), 803-838. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00505.x Cheng, C., Sanchez-Burks, J., & Lee, F. (2008). Connecting the dots within: Creative performance and identity integration. Psychological Science, 19 (11), 1178-1184. http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02220.x Cheng, C. Y., Sanders, M., Sanchez‐Burks, J., Molina, K., Lee, F., Darling, E., & Zhao, Y. (2008). Reaping the rewards of diversity: The role of identity integration. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(3), 1182-1198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751- 9004.2008.00103.x 162 Chou, H. Y., Hecker, R., & Martin, A. (2012). Predicting nurses’ well‐being from job demands and resources: A cross‐sectional study of emotional labour. Journal of Nursing Management, 20(4), 502-511. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1111/j.1365- 2834.2011.01305.x Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd Edition). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., and Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 386-396. Cohen & Williamson (1988). Perceived Stress in a Probability Sample of the United States. In. S. Spacapan, S. & S. Oskamp (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Health. Sage. Cordes, C. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (1993). A review and an integration of research on job burnout. The Academy of Management Review, 18(4), 621–656. https://doi.org/10.2307/258593 Crawford, I., Allison, K. W., Zamboni, B. D., & Soto, T. (2002). The influence of dual-identity development on the psychosocial functioning of African-American gay and bisexual men. Journal of Sex Research, 39, 179-189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224490209552140 Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Sage. Creswell, J. W., V. L. Plano Clark, M. Gutmann, and W. Hanson. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie (Eds.) Handbook on mixed methods in the behavioral and social sciences, (pp. 209–240). Sage. Cross Jr, W. E., & Strauss, L. (1998). The everyday functions of African American identity. In Prejudice (pp. 267-279). Academic Press. Cunningham, G. B., Pickett, A. C., Melton, E. N., Lee, W., & Miner, K. (2014). Psychological safety and the expression of sexual orientation and personal identity. In J. Hargreaves, & E. Anderson (Eds.), Routledge handbook of sport, gender and sexuality; Routledge handbook of sport, gender and sexuality (pp. 406-415, Chapter xx, 524 Pages) Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, New York, NY. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.msu.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest- com.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/books/psychological-safety-expression- sexual/docview/1721927611/se-2?accountid=12598 Darling, E., Molina, K., Sanders, M., Lee, F., & Zhao, Y. (2007). Belonging and Achieving: The Role of Identity Integration. In M. Maehr, S. Karabenick, & T. Urdan (Eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement: Social Psychological Perspective on Motivation and Achievement, Volume 15. New York, NY: Elsevier. 163 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry: An International Journal for the Advancement of Psychological Theory, 11(4), 227-268. De Fina, A. (2007). Code-switching and the construction of ethnic identity in a community of practice. Language in Society, 36(3), 371-392. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404507070182 Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The Job Demands- Resources Model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 499–512. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Vardakou, I., & Kantas, A. (2003). The convergent validity of two burnout instruments: A multitrait-multimethod analysis. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19, 12–23. Demerouti, E., Mostert, K., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Burnout and work engagement: A thorough investigation of the independency of both constructs. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15(3), 209-222. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/a0019408 Dickens, D. D., & Chavez, E. L. (2018). Navigating the workplace: The costs and benefits of shifting identities at work among early career US Black women. Sex Roles, 78(11-12), 760-774. Dickens, D. D., Womack, V. Y., & Dimes, T. (2019). Managing hypervisibility: An exploration of theory and research on identity shifting strategies in the workplace among Black women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 113, 153-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.10.008 Diefendorff, J. M., Erickson, R. J., Grandey, A. A., & Dahling, J. J. (2011). Emotional display rules as work unit norms: A multilevel analysis of emotional labor among nurses. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(2), 170-186. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/a0021725 Diefendorff, J. M., Croyle, M. H., & Gosserand, R. H. (2005). The dimensionality and antecedents of emotional labor strategies. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66(2), 339- 359. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1016/j.jvb.2004.02.001 Diefendorff, J. M., Richard, E. M., & Croyle, M. H. (2006). Are emotional display rules formal job requirements? examination of employee and supervisor perceptions. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(2), 273-298. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1348/096317905X68484 Diefendorff, J. M., Morehart, J., & Gabriel, A, S. (2010). The influence of power and solidarity on emotional display rules at work. Motivation and Emotion, 34, 120–32 Dubois W. E. B. (1903), The Souls of Black Folk, Chicago: A.C. McClurg & Co. 164 Dutton, J. E., Roberts, L. M., & Bednar, J. (2010). Pathways for positive identity construction at work: Four types of positive identity and the building of social resources. Academy of Management Review, 35(2), 265-293. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.35.2.zok265 Ellis, J. M., Rowley, L. L., Nellum, C. J., & Smith, C. D. (2018). From alienation to efficacy: An examination of racial identity and racial academic stereotypes among black male adolescents. Urban Education, 53(7), 899-928. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1177/0042085915602538 Emmerich, A. I., & Rigotti, T. (2017). Reciprocal relations between work-related authenticity and intrinsic motivation, work ability and depressivity: A two-wave study. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 12. Ferguson, G.M., Nguyen, J., Iturbide, M. I., & Giray, C. (2017). Exploring the double-edged sword of cultural variability in interactions with family versus friends. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 60, 83-91. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2017.07.005 Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2000). The interview: from structured questions to negotiated text. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.) (pp. 645–672). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Forbes, C. E., Schmader, T., & Allen, J. J. B. (2008). The role of devaluing and discounting in performance monitoring: A neurophysiological study of minorities under threat. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 3(3), 253-261. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsn012 Future Forum Pulse (October 5, 2021), futureforum.com/pulse-survey Gerpott, F. H., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Wenzel, R., & Voelpel, S. C. (2019). Age diversity and learning outcomes in organizational training groups: The role of knowledge sharing and psychological safety. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1080/09585192.2019.1640763 Gabriel, A. S., Koopman, J., Rosen, C. C., Arnold, J. D., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2020). Are coworkers getting into the act? An examination of emotion regulation in coworker exchanges. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(8), 907–929. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000473 Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotional regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualize emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1), 95-110. 165 Grandey, A. A. (2003). When "the show must go on": Surface acting and deep acting as determinants of emotional exhaustion and peer-rated service delivery. Academy of Management Journal, 46(1), 86-96. Grandey, A., Foo, S. C., Groth, M., & Goodwin, R. E. (2012). Free to be you and me: A climate of authenticity alleviates burnout from emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17(1), 1-14. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/a0025102 Grandey, A. A., & Gabriel, A. S. (2015). Emotional labor at a crossroads: Where do we go from here? Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2(1), 323-349. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111400 Greco, L. M., Porck, J. P., Walter, S. L., Scrimpshire, A. J., & Zabinski, A. M. (2021). A meta- analytic review of identification at work: Relative contribution of team, organizational, and professional identification. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000941 Green, D. E., Walkey, F.H., & Taylor, A.J.W. (1991). The three-factor structure of the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 6, 453–472. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. Haritatos, J., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2002). Bicultural identities: The interface of cultural, personality, and sociocognitive processes. Journal of Research in Personality, 6, 598- 606. Harter, S. (2002). Authenticity. In C R. Snyder & S. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp. 382-394). New York: Oxford University Press. Hebl, M.R. & Kleck, R.E. (2002), Acknowledging one's stigma in the interview setting: Effective strategy or liability? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 223-249. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00214.x Heller, M. 1988. Codeswitching: Anthropological and sociolinguistic perspectives. Berlin: Muyton de Gruyter. Henderson, M. M., Simon, K. A., & Henicheck, J. (2018). The relationship between sexuality– professional identity integration and leadership in the workplace. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 5(3), 338. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/sgd0000277 Hennink, M. M., Kaiser, B. N., & Marconi, V. C. (2017). Code saturation versus meaning saturation: How many interviews are enough? Qualitative Health Research, 27(4), 591- 608. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1177/1049732316665344 166 Hewlin, P. F. (2003). And the award for best actor goes to…: Facades of conformity in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 28(4), 633-642. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2003.10899442 Hewlin, P. F. (2009). Wearing the cloak: Antecedents and consequences of creating facades of conformity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3), 727. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0015228 Hickey, G., & Kipping, C. (1996). Issues in research. A multi-stage approach to the coding of data from open-ended questions. Nurse Researcher, 4, 81-91. Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new approach at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513-524. Hochschild AR. 1983. The Managed Heart: The Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press. Holmes IV, O., Lopiano, G., & Hall, E. V. (2019). A review of compensatory strategies to mitigate bias. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 5(2), 4. http://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2019.02.004 Hong, Y. Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C. Y., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2000). Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. American Psychologist, 55(7), 709. Horsburgh, D. (2003) Evaluation of qualitative research. Journal of Clinical Nursing 12, 307– 312. Hsieh, H., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1177/1049732305276687 Huynh, Q. L., Devos, T., & Smalarz, L. (2011). Perpetual foreigner in one's own land: Potential implications for identity and psychological adjustment. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30(2), 133-162. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2011.30.2.133 Ibarra, H. (1999). Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional adaptation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 764-791. https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2667055 Ilies, R., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic well- being: Understanding leader-follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 373- 394. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.002 Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W., & Stick, S. L. (2006). Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods, 18(1), 3-20. http://doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1177/1525822X05282260 167 Jackson II, R. L. (2002) Cultural contracts theory: Toward an understanding of identity negotiation. Communication Quarterly, 50 (3) 359367, DOI: 10.1080/01463370209385672 Jackson, S. D. (2011). African American acculturation and its relationship to subjective well- being in African American women (Order No. 3481724). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: Social Sciences. (907258749). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.msu.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/african- american-acculturation-relationship/docview/907258749/se-2?accountid=12598 Jones, M. K., & Day, S. X. (2018). An exploration of Black women’s gendered racial identity using a multidimensional and intersectional approach. Sex Roles, 79(1-2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0854-8 Jones, K. P., & King, E. B. (2014). Managing concealable stigmas at work: A review and multilevel model. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1466-1494. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0149206313515518 Jones, K. P., King, E. B., Gilrane, V. L., McCausland, T. C., Cortina, J. M., & Grimm, K. J. (2016). The Baby Bump: Managing a Dynamic Stigma Over Time. Journal of Management, 42(6), 1530–1556. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313503012 Jones, E. E., & Pittman, T.S., (1982) Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In. J. Suls. (Ed.), Psychological Perspectives on the Self (pp. 101-108). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Kacen, L., & Chaitin, J. (2006) The times are a changing: understanding qualitative research in ambiguous, conflictual and changing contexts. Qualitative Report 11, 209–228. Kammeyer‐Mueller, J. D., Rubenstein, A. L., Long, D. M., Odio, M. A., Buckman, B. R., Zhang, Y., & Halvorsen‐Ganepola, M. D. K. (2013). A meta‐analytic structural model of dispositional affectivity and emotional labor. Personnel Psychology, 66(1), 47-90. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1111/peps.12009 Kanter, R. M. (1977). Work and family in the United States: A critical review and agenda for research and policy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Kernis, M. H., & Goldman, B. M. (2006). A multicomponent conceptualization of authenticity: Theory and research. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, vol 38; advances in experimental social psychology, vol 38 (pp. 283-357, Chapter ix, 376 Pages) Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, CA. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38006-9 Retrieved from http://ezproxy.msu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest- com.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/docview/621989434?accountid=12598 168 Kim, E., Bhave, D. P., & Glomb, T. M. (2013). Emotion regulation in workgroups: The roles of demographic diversity and relational work context. Personnel Psychology, 66(3), 613- 644. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1111/peps.12028 Kim, J. Y., Block, C., & Yu, Hong. (2021 In Press) Debunking the ‘model minority’ myth: How positive attitudes toward Asian Americans influence perceptions of racial microaggressions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, In Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2021.103648 King, E. B., Botsford, W. 2009. Managing pregnancy disclosures: Understanding and overcoming the challenges of expectant motherhood at work. Human Resource Management Review, 19, 314-323. King, E. B., Mohr, J. J., Peddie, C. I., Jones, K. P., & Kendra, M. (2017). Predictors of identity management: An exploratory experience-sampling study of lesbian, gay, and bisexual workers. Journal of Management, 43(2), 476-502. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1177/0149206314539350 Kline, R. B. (2004). Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10693-000 Koval, C. Z., & Rosette, A. S. (2021). The Natural Hair Bias in Job Recruitment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(5), 741–750. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620937937 Krannitz, M. A., Grandey, A. A., Liu, S., & Almeida, D. A. (2015). Workplace surface acting and marital partner discontent: Anxiety and exhaustion spillover mechanisms. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20(3), 314-325. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/a0038763 Kulich, C., de Lemus, S., Kosakowska-Berezecka, N., & Lorenzi-Cioldi, F. (2017). Multiple identities management: Effects on (of) identification, attitudes, behavior and well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2258.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02258 LaFromboise, T., Coleman, H. L., & Gerton, J. (1993). Psychological impact of biculturalism: Evidence and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 395. Lee, R. T., & Ashforth, B. E. (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three dimensions of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 123–133. Leong, F. T. L., Eggerth, D. E., Chang, C. H., Flynn, M. A., Ford, J. K., Martinez, R. O. (2017). Occupational Health Disparities: Improving the Well-Bring of Ethnic and Racial Minority Workers. American Psychological Association. Leiter, M. P., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1996). Consistency of the burnout construct across occupations. Anxiety, Stress & Coping: An International Journal, 9(3), 229-243. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1080/10615809608249404 169 Leone, S. S., Huibers, M. J., Knottnerus, J. A. & Kant, I. J. (2007). Similarities, overlap and differences between burnout and prolonged fatigue in the working population. QJM: An international journal of medicine, 100, 617–627. Leroy, H., Anseel, F., Dimitrova, N.G. & Sels, L. (2013). Mindfulness, authentic functioning, and work engagement: a growth modeling approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 82 (3), 238-247. Luna, D., Ringberg, T., & Peracchio, L. A. (2008). One individual, two identities: Frame switching among biculturals. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(2), 279-293. https://doi.org/10.1086/586914 Lyons, B. J., Martinez, L. R., Ruggs, E. N., Hebl, M. R., Ryan, A. M., O’Brien, K. R., & Roebuck, A. (2018). To say or not to say: Different strategies of acknowledging a visible disability. Journal of Management, 44(5), 1980– 2007. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316638160 Lyons, B. J., Volpone, S. D., Wessel, J. L., & Alonso, N. M. (2017). Disclosing a disability: Do strategy type and onset controllability make a difference? Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(9), 1375-1383. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/apl0000230 Madera, J. M., King, E. B., & Hebl, M. R. (2012). Bringing social identity to work: The influence of manifestation and suppression on perceived discrimination, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 18(2), 165- 170. Mäkikangas, A., Hätinen, M., Kinnunen, U., & Pekkonen, M. (2011). Longitudinal factorial invariance of the Maslach burnout inventory-general survey among employees with job- related psychological health problems. Stress and Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress, 27(4), 347-352. http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1002/smi.1381 Maslach, C. & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 99–113. Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory manual (3rd ed.). Consulting Psychologists Press. McCluney, C. L., Robotham, K., Lee, S., Smith, R., Durkee, M. (2019). The Cost of Code- Switching. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2019/11/the-costs-of-codeswitching Ménard, J., & Brunet, L. (2011). Authenticity and well-being in the workplace: A mediation model. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 26(4), 331-346. Metin, U. B., Taris, T. W., Peeters, M. C. W., van Beek, I., & van den Bosch, R. (2016). Authenticity at work—A job-demands resources perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(2), 483-499. 170 Molinsky, A. (2007). Cross-cultural code-switching: The psychological challenges of adapting behavior in foreign cultural interactions. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 622- 640. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.24351878 Morse, J. M. 1991. Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nursing Research, 40, 120–23. Motro, D., Evans, J. B., Ellis, A. P. J., & Benson, L., III. (2021). Race and reactions to women’s expressions of anger at work: Examining the effects of the “angry black woman” stereotype. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advanced online publication. http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/apl0000884 Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo Study to Decide on Sample Size and Determine Power. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(4), 599-620. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1207/S15328007SEM0904_8 Muthén, L. K.., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus User's Guide (6th ed.). Muthén & Muthén. Niens, U., & Cairns, E. (2003). Explaining social change and identity management strategies: New directions for future research. Theory & Psychology, 13(4), 489-509. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F09593543030134003 Nishii, L. H., & Mayer, D. M. (2009). Do inclusive leaders help to reduce turnover in diverse groups? the moderating role of leader–member exchange in the diversity to turnover relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1412-1426. http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/a0017190 O’Brien, E., & Linehan, C. (2019). Problematizing the authentic self in conceptualizations of emotional dissonance. Human Relations, 72(9), 1530-1556. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0018726718809166 Operario, D., Han, C.-S., & Choi, K.-H. (2008). Dual identity among gay Asian Pacific Islander men. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 10, 447-461. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691050701861454 Opie, T. R., & Phillips, K. W. (2015). Hair penalties: The negative influence of afrocentric hair on ratings of black women’s dominance and professionalism. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 14. Ozcelik H. (2013). An empirical analysis of surface acting in intra-organizational relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(3), 291–309 Parama, K. S., Kreiner, D. S., Stark, K. S., & Schuetz, S. A. (2017). Monolingual and bilingual perceptions of code-switching: A difference in cognition but not competence. North American Journal of Psychology, 19(1), 87-101. 171 Pezalla, A. E., Pettigrew, J., & Miller-Day, M. (2012). Researching the researcher-as-instrument: an exercise in interviewer self-reflexivity. Qualitative Research: 12(2), 165–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1487941111422107 Phillips, T. N., Williams, F., & Kirkman, D. (2016) An examination of facades of conformity as a social mobility strategy. Advances in Business Research 7, 103-119. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539-569. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1146/annurev-psych- 120710-100452 Potter, W. J., & Levine-Donnerstein, D. (1999). Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 27, 258-284. Purdie-Vaughns, V., & Eibach, R. P. (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The distinctive advantages and disadvantages of multiple subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 59(5-6), 377–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9424-4 Rafaeli A., & Sutton, R. I. (1987). Expression of emotion as part of the work role. Academy of Management Review, 12(1) 23–37. Ragins, B. R. (2008). Disclosure disconnects: Antecedents and consequences of disclosing invisible stigmas across life domains. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 194-215. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.27752724 Ramarajan, L. (2014). Past, present and future research on multiple identities: Toward an intrapersonal network approach. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 589-659. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2014.912379 Ramarajan, L., & Reid, E. (2013). Shattering the myth of separate worlds: Negotiating nonwork identities at work. Academy of Management Review, 38(4), 621-644. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0314 Ramírez-Esparza, N., Gosling, S. D., Benet-Martínez, V., Potter, J. P., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2006). Do bilinguals have two personalities? A special case of cultural frame switching. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(2), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2004.09.001 Reis, G., Trullen, J., & Story, J. (2016). Perceived organizational culture and engagement: The mediating role of authenticity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(6), 1091-1105. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1108/JMP-05-2015-0178 Riggle, E. D., Rostosky, S. S., Black, W. W., & Rosenkrantz, D. E. (2017). Outness, concealment, and authenticity: Associations with LGB individuals’ psychological distress and well-being. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 4(1), 54. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000202 172 Roberts, L. M. (2005). Changing faces: Professional image construction in diverse organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 30(4), 685-711. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2005.18378873 Roberts, L.M., Cha, S.E., & Kim, S.S. (2014) Strategies for managing impressions of racial identity in the workplace. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 20(4), 529. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0037238 Robinson, O. C., Lopez, F. G., Ramos, K., & Nartova-Bochaver, S. (2012). Authenticity, social context, and well-being in the United States, England, and Russia: A three country comparative analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(5), 719-737. Rosado, S. D. (2003). No Nubian knots or nappy locks: Discussing the politics of hair among women of African descent in the diaspora. A report on research in progress. Transforming Anthropology, 11(2), 60-63. Rosette, A. S., & Dumas, T. L. (2007). The hair dilemma: Conform to mainstream expectations or emphasize racial identity. Duke J. Gender L. & Pol'y, 14, 407. Rosette, A. S., Koval, C. Z., Ma, A., & Livingston, R. (2016). Race matters for women leaders: Intersectional effects on agentic deficiencies and penalties. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 429–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.01.008 Rosette, A. S., Pence de Leon, R., Koval, C. Z., & Harrison, D. A. (2018). Intersectionality: Connecting experiences of gender with race at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 38, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2018.12.002 Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Ruggs, E. N., Martinez, L. R., & Hebl, M. R. (2011). How individuals and organizations can reduce interpersonal discrimination. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(1), 29-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00332.x Ruggs, E. N., Singletary Walker, S., Corrington, A., & Nittrouer, C. L. (2019). “Say it loud, I’m black and proud:” The effectiveness of racial acknowledgments at work. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 5(2), 2. https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2019.02.002 Sayre, G. M., Grandey, A. A., & Chi, N. W. (2019). From cheery to “cheers”? Regulating emotions at work and alcohol consumption after work. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/apl0000452 Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E. (1996). The Maslach Burnout Inventory–General Survey. In C. Maslach, S. E. Jackson, M. P. Leiter (Eds), Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual (3rd ed.) pp. 19–26. Consulting Psychologists Press. 173 Schlegel, R. J., Hicks, J. A., Arndt, J., & King, L. A. (2009). Thine own self: True self-concept accessibility and meaning in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2), 473-490. Schutte, N., Toppinen, S., Kalimo, R., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2000). The factorial validity of the Maslach Burnout Inventory–General Survey (MBI–GS) across occupational groups and nations. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 53–66. Schwartz, S. J., Unger, J. B., Baezconde‐Garbanati, L., Benet‐Martínez, V., Meca, A., Zamboanga, B. L., . . . Szapocznik, J. (2015). Longitudinal trajectories of bicultural identity integration in recently immigrated Hispanic adolescents: Links with mental health and family functioning. International Journal of Psychology, 50(6), 440-450. http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1002/ijop.12196 Scott, B. A., & Barnes, C, M. (2011). A multilevel field investigation of emotional labor, affect, work withdrawal, and gender. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 116–36. Sellers, R. M., Smith, M. A., Shelton, J. N., Rowley, S. A., & Chavous, T. M. (1998). Multidimensional model of racial identity: A reconceptualization of African American racial identity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(1), 18-39. https://doi.org/10.1207%2Fs15327957pspr0201_2 Settles, I. H. (2004). When multiple identities interfere: The role of identity centrality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(4), 487–500. Settles, I. H. (2006). Use of an intersectional framework to understand Black women’s racial and gender identities. Sex Roles, 54(9-10), 589-601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006- 9029-8 Settles, I. H., Buchanan, N. T., & Dotson, K. (2019). Scrutinized but not recognized:(In) visibility and hypervisibility experiences of faculty of color. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 113, 62-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.06.003 Shih, M., Young, M. J., & Bucher, A. (2013). Working to reduce the effects of discrimination: Identity management strategies in organizations. American Psychologist, 68(3), 145. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032250 Singh, B., Winkel, D. E., & Selvarajan, T. T. (2013). Managing diversity at work: Does psychological safety hold the key to racial differences in employee performance? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86(2), 242-263. http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1111/joop.12015 Singletary, S. L., & Hebl, M. R. (2009). Compensatory strategies for reducing interpersonal discrimination: The effectiveness of acknowledgments, increased positivity, and individuating information. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3), 797. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0014185 174 Slay, H. S., & Smith, D. A. (2011). Professional identity construction: Using narrative to understand the negotiation of professional and stigmatized cultural identities. Human Relations, 64(1), 85–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726710384290 Soper, D.S. (2020). A-priori Sample Size Calculator for Structural Equation Models [Software]. Available from http://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc Swann, W. B., Jr., Pelham, B. W., & Krull, D. S. (1989). Agreeable fancy or disagreeable truth? reconciling self-enhancement and self-verification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 782-791. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/0022- 3514.57.5.782 Stryker, S., & Serpe, R. T. (1994). Identity salience and psychological centrality: Equivalent, overlapping, or complementary concepts? Social Psychology Quarterly, 57(1), 16-35. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.2307/2786972 Tajfel, H. (1978) Differentiation between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Academic Press, Salt Lake City. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33-37). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Taylor, S., Burke, L. A., Wheatley, K., & Sompayrac, J. (2011). Effectively facilitating gender transition in the workplace. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 23(2), 101- 116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10672-010-9164-9 Taub, D. E., McLorg, P. A., & Fanflik, P. L. (2004). Stigma management strategies among women with physical disabilities: Contrasting approaches of downplaying or claiming a disability status. Deviant Behavior, 25(2), 169-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639620490269012 Tennant, R., Hiller, L., Fishwick, R., Platt, S., Joseph, S., Weich, S., Parkinson, J., Secker, J., & Stewart-Brown, S. (2007). The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS): Development and UK validation. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 5, 63-76. Thelamour, B., & Johnson, D. J. (2017). Exploring Black immigrants’ and nonimmigrants’ understanding of “acting Black” and “acting White”. Journal of Black Psychology, 43(3), 280-304. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0095798416641863 Thorne, S. (2020). Beyond theming: Making qualitative studies matter. Nursing Inquiry, 27(1) https://doi.org/10.1111/nin.12343 Tragakis, M. W., & Smith, J. L. (2010). The relation between social identity integration and psychological adjustment: A focus on mainstream and marginalized cultural identities. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 10, 201–221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15283488.2010.495909 175 Tschan, F., Rochat, S., & Zapf, D. (2005). It’s not only clients: studying emotion work with clients and co-workers with an event-sampling approach. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 195–220 United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (2020). Household Data, Annual Averages, 11. Employed persons by detailed occupation, sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.pdf United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019). Labor force characteristics by race and ethnicity, 2019. https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/race-and-ethnicity/2018/home.htm van den Broeck, A., Vansteenkiste, M., De Witte, H., Soenens, B., & Lens, W. (2010). Capturing autonomy, competence, and relatedness at work: Construction and initial validation of the work-related basic need satisfaction scale. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 981-1002. van den Bosch, R. & Taris, T. W. (2014). The authentic worker's well-being and performance: The relationship between authenticity at work, well-being, and work outcomes. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 148(6), 659-681. Wagner, D. T., Barnes, C. M., & Scott, B. A. (2014). Driving it home: How workplace emotional labor harms employee home life. Personnel Psychology, 67(2), 487-516. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1111/peps.12044 Walton, G. M., Murphy, M. C., & Ryan, A. M. (2015). Stereotype threat in organizations: Implications for equity and performance. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 523-550. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111322 Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A.E., Hudy, M.J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: how good are single- item measures? Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 247‐252. Wessel, J. L., Barth, S., & Bryant, C. M. (2020). Authenticity different: Authenticity as a diversity management issue. In D. Stone (Ed.), Research in Human Resources Management: Diversity and Inclusion. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc. Wessel, J. L., Hagiwara, N., Ryan, A. M., & Kermond, C. M. (2015). Should women applicants “man up” for traditionally masculine fields? Effectiveness of two verbal identity management strategies. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 39(2), 243-255. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0361684314543265 Wessel, J. L., Huth, M. L., Park, J. Y., & Welle, B. (2020). The importance of role-based and collective authenticity on well-being and withdrawal. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(2), 207-216. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1948550619848002 Wilk, S. L., & Moynihan, L. M. (2005). Display rule “regulators”: the relationship between supervisors and worker emotional exhaustion. J. Appl. Psychol. 90(5):917–27 176 Williams, T. A., & Murphy, C. (2021). Ruminating on what you think of me: A grounded model of construed image work. Academy of Management Journal. Published online. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2020.0963 Willis, H. A., & Neblett, E. W. (2020). Racial identity and changes in psychological distress using the multidimensional model of racial identity. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 26(4), 509-519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000314 Wolf, E. J., Harrington, K. M., Clark, S. L., & Miller, M. W. (2013). Sample size requirements for structural equation models: An evaluation of power, bias, and solution propriety. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(6), 913-934. Wood, A. M., Linley, P. A., Maltby, J., Baliousis, M., & Joseph, S. (2008). The authentic personality: A theoretical and empirical conceptualization and the development of the authenticity scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55(3), 385-399. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/0022-0167.55.3.385 Woods, J. D. (1993). The corporate closet: The professional lives of gay men in America. New York: Free Press. Xanthopoulou, D. & Meier, L. L. (2014). Daily burnout experiences: Critical events and measurement challenges. In M. P. Leiter, A. B. Bakker, & C. Maslach (Eds.), Current issues in work and organizational psychology. Burnout at work: A psychological perspective (p. 80–101). Psychology Press. Xiaotao, Z., Yang, X., Diaz, I., & Yu, M. (2018). Is too much inclusive leadership a good thing? An examination of curvilinear relationship between inclusive leadership and employees’ task performance. International Journal of Manpower, 39(7), 882-895. http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1108/IJM-01-2017-0011 Yoshino, K., & Smith, C. (2013). Uncovering talent: A new model of inclusion. The Leadership Center for Inclusion Deloitte University. Zammuner, V. L., Lotto, L., & Galli, C. (2003). Regulation of emotions in the helping professions: Nature, antecedents and consequences. Advances in Mental Health, 2(1), 1- 13. http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.5172/jamh.2.1.43 Zhao, X., & Biernat, M. (2018). “I have two names, Xian and Alex”: Psychological correlates of adopting Anglo names. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(4), 587-601. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022022118763111 177