1. Introductory information
a. Title of the dataset: 11112020_Merge_2_Anonymized
b. Short description of what data it contains: This anonymized data set includes information on job demands (i.e., Stressful work experiences: Nontransparent work procedures, Work-self conflict, and Discrimination), Perceived diversity, Experienced inclusion, Employee exhaustion, Affective commitment, and control variables (i.e., staff group and minority employee). This study examines the interaction between stressful work experiences, workplace diversity, and inclusion. Our hypothesized moderated moderation model argues that employee exhaustion and affective commitment suffer less from workself conflict, discrimination, and nontransparent work procedures when employees feel included in diverse perceived environments.
a. Contact information:	 Janna Heynen-Behnke, j.behnke@tue.nl

2. Methodological information
The sample comprised 1,918 employees of a technical university located in the Netherlands (response rate: 30.37%). Employees anonymously filled in an online questionnaire. We deleted responses of 731 participants because they provided less than 10% of the requested responses (96%) or they failed the attention check (4%). Our final sample includes 1,187 respondents.  

Stressful Work Experiences
We measured workself conflict (Demerouti et al., 2016) with four items (? = .89) on a 5-point Likert scale and
discrimination (Mena et al., 1987) with three items (? = .83) on a 4-point Likert scale. Transparency of work procedures was measured by three selfdeveloped statements (I know how decisions are made at my  organization, I know how resources are allocated at my organization, and Information about procedures is
provided to all employees), where high scores represent less transparent work procedures (reverse coding).

Perceptions of Workplace Diversity
Following Van Dick et al. (2008), respondents indicated subjective diversity for six dimensions (i.e., age, gender, ethnic background, educational background, personal values, work expertise). Answers ranged from (1) not diverse to (5) very diverse. The calculated mean score represents the level of perceived diversity. Our internal consistency (? = .70) was slightly lower compared to other studies (Van Dick et al., 2008: ? = .75).

Experienced Inclusion
Feelings of belongingness and authenticity were measured with six items (example item This work group treats me as an insider) of Jansen et al.s (2014) Perceived Group Inclusion Scale (? = .94). Answers ranged from (1) never to (5) always.

Employee Outcomes
We used four items from the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (Demerouti & Bakker, 2008) to measure employee exhaustion (? = .78). Answers ranged from (1) totally disagree to (4) totally agree (example item: During my work I feel more often emotionally exhausted). Affective commitment was assessed by three items (? = .60) from Allen and Meyer (1990). Answer possibilities ranged from (1) totally disagree to (7) totally agree (example item: I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization).

Control Variables
Research showed that majority and minority employees perceive their work environment differently (Jansen
et al., 2015). We, therefore, controlled for group membership (0 = minority employee [i.e., being female and/or
international]; 1 = majority employee). Additionally, we controlled for the type of personnel in our analyses to
account for any impact due to different work conditions, tasks, or backgrounds (0 = scientific staff; 1 = nonscientific staff).

3. Data specific information
a. Full names and definitions: These are defined in the data set in the label of each variable

b. Units of measurement: These are defined in the data set in the label of each variable

c. Definitions for codes or symbols used to record missing data: Not applicable

d.  Specialized formats or abbreviations used: Not applicable


