Using this as the foundation, the authors established three hypotheses to demonstrate the efficacy of the dissent expressed. The first hypothesis (H1) is comprised of two parts. The first was simply, “Organizational dissent portrayed on television will be portrayed as instrumentally ineffective more often than it will be portrayed as effective”, and the second, “Organizational dissent portrayed on television will be portrayed as ineffective in eliciting emotional support more often than it will be portrayed as effective.” The next hypothesis (H2), the authors tested), claims, “Organizational dissent portrayed on television will be expressed to supervisors more often than coworkers.” Finally, the third hypothesis (H3) suggested, “Organizational dissent portrayed on television will be expressed to an audience capable of changing the dissent trigger versus audiences not capable of changing the dissent trigger (Garner, Kinsky, Duta, & Danker, …show more content…
Consequently, there is a valid concern that the skewed portrayal of organizational dissent as a futile act, could potentially lead to a shift in an individual’s positive perception of the efficacy of hierarchically vertical dissent or a reaffirmation of one’s negative experiences. Therefore, the possibility exists that should the perception of dissent as an ineffective impetus for change increase, a corresponding decrease in episodes of dissent may occur. Unchecked, this could potentially lead to an imbalance in power resulting in a rise in frequency of “situations in which ‘A’ objectively exploits ‘B’ or hinders his and her pursuit of self-affirmation as a responsible person (Freire,