SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 29

The Mediating Role of Psychological Safety in the Relationship Between Perceived Supportive Leadership and Prosocial Voice Behavior

Destekleyici Liderlik Algısının Kurum Yararına Dile Getirme Davranışına Etkisinde Psikolojik Güvenin Aracılık Rolü

Buket Şimşek(Başkent Üniversitesi)0009-0006-2260-4165
H. Nejat Basım(Başkent Üniversitesi)0000-0002-2605-9962
Pages
937–958
Publication Date
2026-10-14
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that the perception of supportive leadership has a positive and significant effect on prosocial voice behavior.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Today, employees’ ability to freely express their ideas and opinions is considered a critical factor for innovation and organizational development and is also important for organizations’ ability to adapt to changing conditions and sustain this adaptability.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study employed a quantitative research design based on data collected through a survey from 405 employees working in both the public and private sectors across Türkiye using convenience sampling.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that the perception of supportive leadership has a positive and significant effect on prosocial voice behavior.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Destekleyici liderlik algısı · kurum yararına dile getirme davranışı · psikolojik güven

Abstract

Today, employees’ ability to freely express their ideas and opinions is considered a critical factor for innovation and organizational development and is also important for organizations’ ability to adapt to changing conditions and sustain this adaptability. The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between the perception of supportive leadership and prosocial voice behavior, as well as the mediating role of psychological safety in this process, and to test the hypothesis developed based on the relevant literature. This study employed a quantitative research design based on data collected through a survey from 405 employees working in both the public and private sectors across Türkiye using convenience sampling. The data were analyzed using regression and mediation analyses conducted through the PROCESS v4.0 macro in SPSS. The findings indicate that the perception of supportive leadership has a positive and significant effect on prosocial voice behavior. This suggests that supportive behaviors of leaders play an important role in encouraging employees to express their ideas and opinions for the benefit of the organization. Additionally, the study found that psychological safety has a partial mediating effect on the relationship between supportive leadership perception and prosocial voice behavior. The indirect effect was found to be significant (B=0.073), 95% bootstrap CI (0.0018-0.1500), and the direct effect of perceived supportive leadership remained significant after psychological safety was included in the model (B=0.180, p=0.003). These findings suggest that supportive leadership affects prosocial voice not only directly but also indirectly by enhancing employees’ psychological safety.

Özet

Günümüzde çalışanların fikir ve görüşlerini özgürce ifade etmeleri, yenilik ve örgütsel gelişim açısından kritik bir unsur olarak değerlendirilmekle birlikte, örgütlerin değişen koşullara uyum sağlamaları ve bu uyumu sürdürülebilir kılmaları açısından da önem taşımaktadır. Bu doğrultuda bu çalışmanın amacı, destekleyici liderlik algısı ile kurum yararına dile getirme davranışı arasındaki ilişkiyi ve bu süreçte psikolojik güvenin aracılık rolünü incelemek ve ilgili literatür doğrultusunda geliştirilen hipotezleri test etmektir. Bu çalışmada, Türkiye’nin farklı illerinde kamu ve özel sektörde görev yapan 405 çalışandan kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle ve anket aracılığıyla toplanan verilere dayalı nicel bir araştırma tasarımı kullanılmıştır. Veriler, SPSS ortamında PROCESS v4.0 makrosu aracılığıyla gerçekleştirilen regresyon ve aracılık analizleri ile incelenmiştir. Bulgular, destekleyici liderlik algısının kurum yararına dile getirme davranışını pozitif yönde ve anlamlı biçimde etkilediğini göstermektedir. Bu durum, liderin destekleyici davranışlarının çalışanların kurum yararına fikir ve görüşlerini dile getirmelerinde etkili olduğuna işaret etmektedir. Araştırmada ayrıca, psikolojik güvenin destekleyici liderlik algısı ile kurum yararına dile getirme davranışı arasındaki ilişkide kısmi aracılık etkisine sahip olduğu bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır. Dolaylı etkinin anlamlı olduğu belirlenmiştir (B=0,073); %95 bootstrap GA (0,0018-0,1500) ve psikolojik güven modele dahil edildiğinde destekleyici liderliğin doğrudan etkisi anlamlılığını sürdürmüştür (B=0,180; p=0,003). Bu bulgular, çalışanların kurum yararına dile getirme davranışına yönlendirilebilmeleri için yöneticilerin destekleyici liderlik davranışlarını güçlendirmelerinim ve çalışanların kişilerarası risk algısını azaltarak psikolojik açıdan güvenli bir çalışma ortamı oluşturmalarının önem taşıdığını göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Şimşek, B., Basım, H. N. (2026). The Mediating Role of Psychological Safety in the Relationship Between Perceived Supportive Leadership and Prosocial Voice Behavior. İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Sayı: 29, 937–958. https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.1940598

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (70)

  1. Agarwal, P., & Farndale, E. (2017). High-performance work systems and creativity implementation: The role of psychological capital and psychological safety. Human Resource Management Journal, 27(3), 440-458. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12148
  2. Ashford, S. J., Rothbard, N. P., Piderit, S. K., & Dutton, J. E. (1998). Out on a limb: The role of context and impression management in selling gender-equity issues. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(1), 23–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393590
  3. Aydın Göktepe, E. (2017). Algılanan yönetici desteği ölçeği: Geliştirilmesi, geçerliliği ve güvenirliliği. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 46, 31-48. https://izlik.org/JA97NN46MD
  4. Aydın, E., & Basım, N. (2017). İş aile çatışması ile örgütsel bağlılık etkileşimde algılanan yönetici desteğinin rolü: Görgül bir araştırma. Business and Economics Research Journal, 8(4), 773-784. https://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2017.82
  5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall.
  6. Bano, S., Li, J., & Imran, M. (2024). Exploring the relationship among ethical leadership, psychological safety, conflict management strategies, and job performance: The moderating role of inclusive environment. Sustainability 16(22), Makale 10140. https://doi.org/10.3390/su162210140
  7. Bilgin, N., Gülşen, M., Kutlu, A. & Çınar Pakyüz, S. (2019). Çalışan sessizlik ve seslilik davranışları ölçeğinin öğretim elemanları üzerinde Türkçeye uyarlanması. Ege Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Dergisi, 35(3), 103-114. https://izlik.org/JA99CN89XT
  8. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. John Wiley & Sons.
  9. Bowers D. G., & Seashore, S. E. (1966). Predicting organizational effectiveness with a four-factor theory of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 11(2), 238-263. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391247
  10. Can Yalçın, R., & Fayganoğlu, P. (2022). Çalışan sesliliği liderden duyulan tatmin ve mesleki özdeşleşmeden etkilenir mi? Hizmet sektörü çalışanları örneği. Business and Economics Research Journal, 13(2), 329-348. https://dx.doi.org/10.20409/berj.2022.376
  11. Carmeli, A. & Gittell, J. H. (2009). High-quality relationships, psychological safety, and learning from failures in work organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(6), 709–729. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.565
  12. Chamberlin, M., Newton, D. W., & Lepine, J.A. (2017). A meta-analysis of voice and its promotive and prohibitive forms: Identification of key associations, distinctions, and future research directions. Personnel Psychology, 70(1), 11–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12185
  13. Chen, G., & Tjosvold, D. (2012). Shared rewards and goal interdependence for psychological safety among departments in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(2), 433-452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-010-9201-0
  14. Chih, Y. Y., Kiazad, K., Cheng, D., Emamirad, E., & Restubog, S. L. (2018). Interactive effects of supportive leadership and top management team’s charismatic vision in predicting worker retention in the Philippines. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(10). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001553
  15. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
  16. Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874-900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602
  17. Çiftçi, D. Ö. (2019). Lider üye etkileşiminin işe adanmışlık üzerindeki etkisinde psikolojik güçlendirmenin aracı rolü. Business and Economics Research Journal, 10(1), 167-186. https://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2019.161
  18. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985a). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
  19. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985b). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6
  20. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
  21. Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a work organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 580-590. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.4.580
  22. Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-determination theory in work organizations: The state of a science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 19-43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108
  23. Detert, J. R., & Edmondson, A. C. (2011), Implicit voice theories: Taken-for-granted rules of self-censorship at work. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 461-488. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61967925
  24. Detert, J. R., Burris, E. R., Harrison, D. A., & Martin, S. R. (2013). Voice flows to and around leaders: Understanding when units are helped or hurt by employee voice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(4), 624-668. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839213510151
  25. Detert, J.R., & Burris, E.R. (2007), Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open?. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869-884. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.26279183
  26. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–83. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
  27. Edmondson, A. C. (2004). Psychological safety, trust, and learning in organizations: A group-level lens. R. M. Kramer & K.S. Cook (Ed.), Trust and distrust in organizations: Dilemmas and approaches içinde (ss. 239-272). Russell Sage Foundation.
  28. Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I. L., & Rhoades, L. (2002). Perceived supervisor support: Contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 565-573. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.565
  29. Fatoki, O. (2024). Inclusive leadership and employee voice behaviour: Serial mediating effects of psychological safety and affective commitment. Administrative Sciences, 14(9), Makale 199. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14090199
  30. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  31. Fuller, J. B., Barnett, T., Hester, K., Relyea, C., & Frey, L. (2007). An exploratory examination of voice behavior from an impression management perspective. Journal of Managerial Issues, 19(1), 134-151. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40601197
  32. Greguras, G. J., & Ford, J. M. (2006). An examination of the multidimensionality of supervisor and subordinate perceptions of leader–member exchange. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(3), 433–465. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317905X53859
  33. Hayes, A. F. (2022). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
  34. Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Harvard University Press.
  35. House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90024-7
  36. Islam, T., Ahmed, I., & Ali, G. (2019). Effects of ethical leadership on bullying and voice behavior among nurses: mediating role of organizational identification, poor working condition and workload. Leadership in Health Services, 32(1), 2–17. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHS-02-2017-0006
  37. Jada, U. R., & Mukhopadhyay, S. (2018). Empowering leadership and constructive voice behavior: a moderated mediated model. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 26(2), 226–241. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-03-2017-1146
  38. Jiang, X., & Wei, Y. (2024). Linking servant leadership to followers’ thriving at work: Self-determination theory perspective. Frontiers Psychology, 15, Makale 1384110. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1384110
  39. Jin, X., Qing, C., & Jin, S. (2022). Ethical leadership and innovative behavior: Mediating role of voice behavior and moderated mediation role of psychological safety. Sustainability, 14(9), Makale 5125. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095125
  40. Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal 33(4), 692–724. https://doi.org/10.5465/256287
  41. Khan, M. M., Mubarik, M. S., Ahmed, S. S., & Islam, T. (2025). Speak up to speed up innovation: Servant leadership triggered innovative work behavior mediated through voice behavior. International Journal of Innovation Science, 17(2), 261-279. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-03-2023-0067
  42. Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101
  43. Kottke, K. E., & Sharafinski, C. E. (1988). Measuring perceived supervisory and organizational support. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48(4), 1075-1079. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164488484024
  44. Lam, L. W. (2012). Impact of competitiveness on salespeople’s commitment and performance. Journal of Business Research, 65(9), 1328–1334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.026
  45. Lapointe, É., & Vandenberghe, C. (2018). Examination of the relationships between servant leadership, organizational commitment, and voice and antisocial behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(1), 99–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-3002-9
  46. Liang, J., Farh C. I. C., & Farh, J. L (2012). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0176
  47. Liang, S. G. (2017). Linking leader authentic personality to employee voice behaviour: A multilevel mediation model of authentic leadership development. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(3), 434-443. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2017.1293656
  48. Liu, C., Wu, M. & Chen, X. (2023). A chain mediation model of inclusive leadership and voice behavior among university teachers: Evidence from China. Scientific Reports, 13, Makale 22377. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-50018-2
  49. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346
  50. Memon, K. R., & Ghani, B. (2021). The relationship between performance appraisal system and employees’ voice behavior through the mediation-moderation mechanism. South Asian Journal of Business Studies, 12(2), 220-241. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAJBS-01-2020-0012
  51. Miceli, M. P., & Near, J. P. (1992). Blowing the whistle: The organizational and legal implications for companies and employees. Lexington Books.
  52. Morrison, E. (2011). Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 373–412. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2011.574506
  53. Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. (2000). Organizational silence: a barrier to change and development in a pluralistic World. The Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 706-725. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2000.3707697
  54. Newman, A., Donohue, R., & Eva, N. (2017a). Psychological safety: A systematic review of the literature. Human Resource Management Review, 27(3), 521-535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.01.001
  55. Newman, A., Schwarz, G., Cooper, B., & Sendjaya, S. (2017b). How servant leadership influences organizational citizenship behavior: The roles of LMX, empowerment, and proactive personality. Journal of Business Ethics, 145, 49-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2827-6
  56. O’Donovan, R., & McAuliffe, E. (2020). A systematic review of factors that enable psychological safety in healthcare teams. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 32, 240–50. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzaa025
  57. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
  58. Qi, L., Xu, Y., & Liu, B. (2023). Does justice matter in voice? Inclusive leadership and employee voice: The moderating role of organizational justice perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Makale 1313922. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1313922
  59. Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(3), 450-461. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.3.450
  60. Settoon, R. P., Bennett, N., & Liden, R. C. (1996). Social exchange in organizations: Perceived organizational support, leader–member exchange, and employee reciprocity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(3), 219–227. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.3.219
  61. Son, S. (2019). The role of supervisors on employees’ voice behavior. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 40(1), 85-96. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-06-2018-0230
  62. Soyalın, M. (2019). Örgütsel etik iklim, psikolojik güvenlik, güç mesafesi yönelimi ve çalışan sesliliği davranışı arasındaki ilişkiler (Doktora tezi, Atatürk Üniversitesi). YÖK Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
  63. Soyalın, M., & Karabey, C. N. (2020). Örgütsel etik iklim ve çalışan sesliliği davranışı arasındaki ilişki: Psikolojik güvenliğin aracı rolü. Business and Economics Research Journal, 11(3), 875-889. https://doi.org/10.20409/berj.2020.287
  64. Tangirala, S., & Ramanujam, R. (2008). Exploring nonlinearity in employee voice: the effects of personal control and organizational identification. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6), 1189-1203. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2008.35732719
  65. Van Dyne, L., & LePine J. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal 41(1), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.5465/256902
  66. Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359-1392. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00384
  67. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. John Wiley.
  68. Walumbwa, F.O., & Schaubroeck, J. (2009). Leader personality traits and employee voice behavior: Mediating roles of ethical leadership and work group psychological safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1275-1286. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015848
  69. Xu, M., Qin, X., Dust, S. B., & DiRenzo, M. S. (2019). Supervisor-subordinate proactive personality congruence and psychological safety: A signaling theory approach to employee voice behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(4), 440-453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.03.001
  70. Yener, S. (2015). Psikolojik rahatlık ölçeğinin Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ordu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(13), 280-305. https://izlik.org/JA64MY69YD