Journal of Applied Psychology最新文献

Interviews are one of the most widely used selection methods, but their reliability and validity can vary substantially. Further, using human evaluators to rate an interview can be expensive and time consuming. Interview scoring models have been proposed as a mechanism for reliably, accurately, and efficiently scoring video-based interviews. Yet, there is a lack of clarity and consensus around their psychometric characteristics, primarily driven by a dearth of published empirical research. The goal of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of automated video interview competency assessments (AVI-CAs), which were designed to be highly generalizable (i.e., apply across job roles and organizations). The AVI-CAs developed demonstrated high levels of convergent validity (average r value of .66), moderate discriminant relationships (average r value of .58), good test-retest reliability (average r value of .72), and minimal levels of subgroup differences (Cohen's ds ≥ -.14). Further, criterion-related validity (uncorrected sample-weighted r¯ = .24) was demonstrated by applying these AVI-CAs to five organizational samples. Strengths, weaknesses, and future directions for building interview scoring models are also discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Boredom is an emotion that constantly fluctuates in employees of all ages and occupations. Here, we draw on functional theories of boredom and theories of emotion regulation to develop an episodic model of how boredom shapes employee attention and productivity over time. We argue that employees often suppress boredom at work to "power through" boring tasks and objectives, resulting in residual bouts of mind-wandering-and thus productivity deficits-during future performance episodes. However, following boredom on an initial task, the commencement of a subsequent task that employees perceive to be meaningful creates an attentional pull that breaks the link between boredom and future mind-wandering, preventing the effects of boredom from spilling over to inhibit future productivity. Study 1 draws on archival experience sampling data to test our hypotheses and examine whether boredom exhibits reciprocal relationships with mind-wandering and productivity over time. Study 2 uses an experimental design to determine whether boredom and task meaningfulness interact to exert a causal effect on future mind-wandering. Study 3 uses a time-separated single-day design to replicate Studies 1 and 2 and examine our contention that employees often suppress boredom at work which, rather than preventing the effects of boredom, puts them "on hold" until a later point in time. Our findings provide insight into how to mitigate the far-reaching effects of boredom at work; they also advance episodic accounts of emotions, attention, and performance in organizations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

People increasingly support themselves through multiple jobholding-concurrently performing more than one job-and spend time enacting their professional identities each day. In accordance with self-consistency theory, scholars have emphasized that having to act out more than one professional identity promotes a fragmented sense of self for multiple jobholders, which impedes the meaningfulness of their work. However, we assert that this prevailing view about self-inconsistency is incomplete and problematic because it overlooks consideration for how enacting multiple professional identities may be a self-expanding and stimulating experience that satisfies basic needs for growth and exploration. By jointly applying self-expansion theory and self-consistency theory to the day-to-day experience of wearing multiple hats, we unpack how and why enacting multiple professional identities has countervailing implications for work meaningfulness through its effects on stimulation and self-alienation. We also consider the moderating role of identity contrast on these pathways to meaningfulness. We investigate our assertions in a series of preregistered studies-a comprehensive test of our model in a 15-day experience sampling study (Study 1) as well as constructive replications of each stage of our model (Study 2). Overall, we offer novel insights about the day-to-day tension between stimulation and self-alienation for people who act out multiple professional identities and the impact on the meaningfulness of their work. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

As organizations continue to supplement and replace human management with artificial intelligence (AI), it is essential that we understand the factors that influence employees' trust in AI management. Across one preregistered field study, where we survey 400 delivery riders in Mainland China, and three preregistered experiments (total N = 2,350), we find that AI management is perceived as less benevolent than human management. Given that benevolence is an important antecedent of trust in leaders, this perception has a negative effect on trust in AI management, even when controlling for perceived ability and integrity. Employees prefer human management to AI management in high empathy demand contexts, where individuals seek management that can empathize and experience the emotions that they are feeling, as opposed to low empathy demand contexts. These findings deepen our understanding of trust and provide important theoretical and practical insights on the implementation and adoption of AI management. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

To investigate research questions surrounding workplace deviance, scholars have primarily applied variable-centered approaches, such as overall deviance measures or those that separate interpersonal deviance and organizational deviance. These approaches, however, ignore that individuals might employ more complex combinations of deviance behaviors that do not fit neatly within the existing variable frameworks. The present study explores whether person-centered deviance classes emerge in a comprehensive database of the prior studies. We then investigated whether these classes showed differences in antecedents and correlates in an independent sample of working adults from multiple industries. In Study 1, a multilevel latent class analysis of 20 independent samples and 6,218 individuals revealed five classes of workplace deviance, thus providing preliminary support for a person-centered approach. In Study 2, a time-lagged sample of 553 individuals showed the emergence of five classes that largely reflected the patterns found in Study 1. Study 2 points to meaningful differences between classes of deviance behaviors and antecedents, including abusive supervision, Openness, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, Emotional Stability, and psychological entitlement; classes are also uniquely associated with correlates such as organizational citizenship behaviors, turnover intentions, job performance, and job satisfaction. Altogether, this work is an important first step toward understanding workplace deviance with a person-centered lens. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Organizations are increasingly expecting individuals to engage in task proactivity, that is, to find better ways of doing their job. While prior research has demonstrated the benefits of task proactivity, little is known about its cognitive costs. To investigate this issue, we build theory on how task proactivity affects end-of-day cognitive performance. We propose that task proactivity involves deviating from established ways of working and engaging in cognitively demanding activities requiring high levels of mental effort, which manifest as an erosion of end-of-day cognitive performance. In two daily diary studies, we found that individuals engaging in task proactivity experience lower end-of-day cognitive performance (Study 1 over five consecutive workdays: n = 163, k = 701; Study 2 with multiple daily assessments over seven consecutive workdays: n = 93, k = 471), even when controlling for task performance (Study 1) and beginning-of-day cognitive performance (Study 2). In two experiments, we then show that simulating task proactivity results in greater mental effort and lower routineness but not in greater ego depletion (Study 3: N = 318 and Study 4: N = 319) or increased self-control demands, -effort, or -motivation (Study 4). This provides support for our proposed cognitive pathway. Our findings enhance our understanding of the cognitively demanding nature of task proactivity and provide empirical support for its cognitive costs using a mental fatigue lens. They also suggest that the impact of a cognitively demanding activity like task proactivity may persist throughout the day and carry over to other tasks involving cognitive performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Coping is a dynamic response to stressors that employees encounter in their work and nonwork roles. Scholars have argued that it is not just whether employees cope with work-nonwork stressors-but how they cope-that matters. Indeed, prior research assumes that adaptive coping strategies-planning, prioritizing, positive reframing, seeking emotional and instrumental support-are universally beneficial, suggesting that sustaining high levels of these strategies is ideal. By returning to the roots of coping theory, we adopt a person-centered, dynamic approach using latent profile analysis and latent transition analysis across three multiwave studies (N = 1,370) to consider whether employees combine coping strategies and how remaining in or shifting between such combinations also matters. In a pilot study (N = 361), we explored profiles and their transitions during a time frame punctuated with macrolevel transitions that amplified employees' work-nonwork stressors (i.e., COVID-19), which revealed three profiles at Time 1 (comprehensive copers, emotion-focused copers, and individualistic copers) and a fourth profile at Time 2 (surviving copers). In Study 1 (N = 648), across all three time points, we replicated three profiles and found evidence for constrained copers instead of emotion-focused copers. In Study 2 (N = 361), across both time points, we replicated all four profiles from Study 1 and tested hypotheses regarding the profiles, their transition patterns, and implications of such patterns for work, well-being, and social functioning outcomes. Altogether, our work suggests that maintaining high-coping depth or increasing depth is generally beneficial, whereas maintaining or increasing coping breadth is generally harmful. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Organizations often need to deal with ambiguous threats, which are complex, unprecedented, and difficult-to-predict events that hold the potential to cause harm. Drawing on the attention-based view of work behavior, we propose that employees do not always remain vigilant to such threats. Consequently, we argue that, in the face of those threats, employees can fail to notice or recognize problems or vulnerabilities in their organizations' work processes or products that can hinder coping. We posit that this effect is, paradoxically, more pronounced when employees are working with trustworthy managers who are perceived as capable and focused enough on the well-being of their units to adequately deal with work challenges. Thereby, we highlight that employees may overlook problems and thus not speak up, precisely when their input is highly desired to address ambiguous threats and can be effectively used by competent and caring managers. Using a combination of field surveys and preregistered experiments, we demonstrate support for our arguments. In the process, we present an alternative attention-based perspective to the voice literature that has so far predominantly focused on cost-benefit-based explanations (i.e., how employees evaluate the perceived costs of speaking up vs. presumed benefits) when describing hurdles to employee voice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).