Despite Americans' recent heightened awareness of racial inequality, anti-Asian racism at work remains underrecognized and largely unaddressed. In this research, we aim to understand why White bystander coworkers may fail to confront anti-Asian racism. Integrating the moral exclusion perspective and research on racial positions, we propose that due to perceiving Asian Americans as more foreign than other non-White coworkers, White coworkers are less likely to feel anger and engage in confrontation when witnessing anti-Asian racism at work. We first conducted a survey study (Study 1), demonstrating the external validity of the phenomenon that White coworkers are less likely to confront racism when the victim is Asian American versus Black. We then conducted two experiments (Studies 2 and 3) with a realistic, interactive design and behavioral measures of confrontation, supporting our hypothesized mechanisms (i.e., perceived target foreignness and anger). Study 3 further generalized our theory by including Hispanic/Latinx American targets as an additional comparison group and showing that the relative perceived foreignness among Asian American, Hispanic/Latinx American, and Black targets reduced White coworkers' anger and confrontation. We then conclude by discussing the theoretical and practical implications of our work. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"What happens after anti-Asian racism at work? A moral exclusion perspective on coworker confrontation and mechanisms.","authors":"Anjier Chen, Liuxin Yan, Min Young Yoon","doi":"10.1037/apl0001242","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001242","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite Americans' recent heightened awareness of racial inequality, anti-Asian racism at work remains underrecognized and largely unaddressed. In this research, we aim to understand why White bystander coworkers may fail to confront anti-Asian racism. Integrating the moral exclusion perspective and research on racial positions, we propose that due to perceiving Asian Americans as more foreign than other non-White coworkers, White coworkers are less likely to feel anger and engage in confrontation when witnessing anti-Asian racism at work. We first conducted a survey study (Study 1), demonstrating the external validity of the phenomenon that White coworkers are less likely to confront racism when the victim is Asian American versus Black. We then conducted two experiments (Studies 2 and 3) with a realistic, interactive design and behavioral measures of confrontation, supporting our hypothesized mechanisms (i.e., perceived target foreignness and anger). Study 3 further generalized our theory by including Hispanic/Latinx American targets as an additional comparison group and showing that the relative perceived foreignness among Asian American, Hispanic/Latinx American, and Black targets reduced White coworkers' anger and confrontation. We then conclude by discussing the theoretical and practical implications of our work. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142347252","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Automated video interviews (AVIs) that use machine learning (ML) algorithms to assess interviewees are increasingly popular. Extending prior AVI research focusing on noncognitive constructs, the present study critically evaluates the possibility of assessing cognitive ability with AVIs. By developing and examining AVI ML models trained to predict measures of three cognitive ability constructs (i.e., general mental ability, verbal ability, and intellect [as observed at zero acquaintance]), this research contributes to the literature in several ways. First, it advances our understanding of how cognitive abilities relate to interviewee behavior. Specifically, we found that verbal behaviors best predicted interviewee cognitive abilities, while neither paraverbal nor nonverbal behaviors provided incremental validity, suggesting that only verbal behaviors should be used to assess cognitive abilities. Second, across two samples of mock video interviews, we extensively evaluated the psychometric properties of the verbal behavior AVI ML model scores, including their reliability (internal consistency across interview questions and test-retest), validity (relationships with other variables and content), and fairness and bias (measurement and predictive). Overall, the general mental ability, verbal ability, and intellect AVI models captured similar behavioral manifestations of cognitive ability. Validity evidence results were mixed: For example, AVIs trained on observer-rated intellect exhibited superior convergent and criterion relationships (compared to the observer ratings they were trained to model) but had limited discriminant validity evidence. Our findings illustrate the importance of examining psychometric properties beyond convergence with the test that ML algorithms are trained to model. We provide recommendations for enhancing discriminant validity evidence in future AVIs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
使用机器学习(ML)算法评估受访者的自动视频访谈(AVI)越来越受欢迎。本研究扩展了之前针对非认知建构的 AVI 研究,对使用 AVI 评估认知能力的可能性进行了批判性评估。通过开发和检验经过训练的 AVI ML 模型来预测三种认知能力结构(即一般心智能力、言语能力和智力[在零认识时观察到的])的测量结果,本研究在几个方面对文献做出了贡献。首先,它加深了我们对认知能力与受访者行为之间关系的理解。具体来说,我们发现言语行为最能预测受访者的认知能力,而准言语行为和非言语行为都不能提供增量有效性,这表明只应使用言语行为来评估认知能力。其次,在两个模拟视频面试样本中,我们广泛评估了言语行为 AVI ML 模型得分的心理测量特性,包括其可靠性(不同面试问题之间的内部一致性和重测)、有效性(与其他变量和内容之间的关系)以及公平性和偏差(测量和预测)。总体而言,一般心智能力、言语能力和智力 AVI 模型捕捉到了认知能力的类似行为表现。有效性证据结果不一:例如,根据观察者评定的智力进行训练的 AVIs 表现出较好的收敛性和标准性关系(与观察者评定的智力相比),但其判别效度证据有限。我们的研究结果表明,在对 ML 算法进行建模训练时,除了对测试的收敛性进行检查外,还必须对心理测量特性进行检查。我们为在未来的 AVI 中增强判别有效性证据提供了建议。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Are automated video interviews smart enough? Behavioral modes, reliability, validity, and bias of machine learning cognitive ability assessments.","authors":"Louis Hickman,Louis Tay,Sang Eun Woo","doi":"10.1037/apl0001236","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001236","url":null,"abstract":"Automated video interviews (AVIs) that use machine learning (ML) algorithms to assess interviewees are increasingly popular. Extending prior AVI research focusing on noncognitive constructs, the present study critically evaluates the possibility of assessing cognitive ability with AVIs. By developing and examining AVI ML models trained to predict measures of three cognitive ability constructs (i.e., general mental ability, verbal ability, and intellect [as observed at zero acquaintance]), this research contributes to the literature in several ways. First, it advances our understanding of how cognitive abilities relate to interviewee behavior. Specifically, we found that verbal behaviors best predicted interviewee cognitive abilities, while neither paraverbal nor nonverbal behaviors provided incremental validity, suggesting that only verbal behaviors should be used to assess cognitive abilities. Second, across two samples of mock video interviews, we extensively evaluated the psychometric properties of the verbal behavior AVI ML model scores, including their reliability (internal consistency across interview questions and test-retest), validity (relationships with other variables and content), and fairness and bias (measurement and predictive). Overall, the general mental ability, verbal ability, and intellect AVI models captured similar behavioral manifestations of cognitive ability. Validity evidence results were mixed: For example, AVIs trained on observer-rated intellect exhibited superior convergent and criterion relationships (compared to the observer ratings they were trained to model) but had limited discriminant validity evidence. Our findings illustrate the importance of examining psychometric properties beyond convergence with the test that ML algorithms are trained to model. We provide recommendations for enhancing discriminant validity evidence in future AVIs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":"217 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.9,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142324992","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Although the literature on individual job crafting has proliferated over the past decade, research on the collaborative crafting efforts of organizational teams has lagged behind, which is surprising given the prominence of team-based arrangements in contemporary work and the importance of team proactivity in today's business environment. Drawing on proactive motivation theory and the literature on proactive performance in teams, this article presents a large-scale intervention study aimed at increasing team proactive motivation, including a pretest/posttest control group with 96 teams and 1,077 employees. We study the extent to which a team proactive motivation intervention is associated with changes in three dimensions of team crafting (task team crafting, relational team crafting, and cognitive team crafting) at both 6 months and 1 year after the intervention. We also examine the mediating role of change in the three team-level crafting dimensions in explaining the association between the intervention and change in team performance over time. Our results show that the intervention is positively associated with change in all three forms of team crafting. Furthermore, change in team crafting positively associates with change in team performance 6 months and 1 year after the intervention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"Enhancing team crafting through proactive motivation: An intervention study.","authors":"Jeroen P de Jong,Inge De Clippeleer,Ans De Vos","doi":"10.1037/apl0001220","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001220","url":null,"abstract":"Although the literature on individual job crafting has proliferated over the past decade, research on the collaborative crafting efforts of organizational teams has lagged behind, which is surprising given the prominence of team-based arrangements in contemporary work and the importance of team proactivity in today's business environment. Drawing on proactive motivation theory and the literature on proactive performance in teams, this article presents a large-scale intervention study aimed at increasing team proactive motivation, including a pretest/posttest control group with 96 teams and 1,077 employees. We study the extent to which a team proactive motivation intervention is associated with changes in three dimensions of team crafting (task team crafting, relational team crafting, and cognitive team crafting) at both 6 months and 1 year after the intervention. We also examine the mediating role of change in the three team-level crafting dimensions in explaining the association between the intervention and change in team performance over time. Our results show that the intervention is positively associated with change in all three forms of team crafting. Furthermore, change in team crafting positively associates with change in team performance 6 months and 1 year after the intervention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.9,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142324990","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Zhanna Lyubykh,Rui Zhong,The Ton Vuong,Sandra L Robinson,M Sandy Hershcovis
This meta-analysis aims to understand the impact of witnessed workplace mistreatment. Bringing together two streams of research, it examines (a) the boundary conditions of observer reactions that reflect a principled moral disapproval of violations of interpersonal justice (i.e., deontic reactions) and (b) the extent to which witnessed mistreatment explains incremental variance in a range of employee outcomes beyond the effects of experienced mistreatment. The results demonstrate that observer psychological and behavioral deontic reactions are not straightforward. For example, while observers have negative reactions toward perpetrators, they fail to intervene and have mixed reactions toward targets. Findings from a series of moderator analyses illuminate the role of perpetrator rank, mistreatment severity, and study context in explaining these disparate observer deontic reactions. Further, although experienced mistreatment explains more variance in most employee outcomes than witnessed mistreatment, witnessed mistreatment still has a unique and sizable contribution. The implications of these findings and future directions for research on witnessed mistreatment are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
本荟萃分析旨在了解目睹的工作场所虐待行为的影响。它汇集了两方面的研究,考察了(a)观察者反应的边界条件,这些反应反映了对违反人际公正的原则性道德不认可(即道义反应);以及(b)在经历虐待的影响之外,目睹虐待在多大程度上解释了一系列员工结果的增量差异。研究结果表明,观察者的心理和行为倾向性反应并非直截了当。例如,虽然观察者对施虐者有负面反应,但他们没有进行干预,对施虐对象的反应也不尽相同。一系列调节分析的结果阐明了施虐者等级、虐待严重程度和研究背景在解释这些不同的观察者意愿反应中所起的作用。此外,尽管经历过的虐待比目睹过的虐待更能解释大多数员工结果的差异,但目睹过的虐待仍有其独特而可观的贡献。本文讨论了这些研究结果的意义以及有关目睹虐待的未来研究方向。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
{"title":"Understanding the impact of witnessed workplace mistreatment: A meta-analysis of observer deontic reactions and employee outcomes.","authors":"Zhanna Lyubykh,Rui Zhong,The Ton Vuong,Sandra L Robinson,M Sandy Hershcovis","doi":"10.1037/apl0001239","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001239","url":null,"abstract":"This meta-analysis aims to understand the impact of witnessed workplace mistreatment. Bringing together two streams of research, it examines (a) the boundary conditions of observer reactions that reflect a principled moral disapproval of violations of interpersonal justice (i.e., deontic reactions) and (b) the extent to which witnessed mistreatment explains incremental variance in a range of employee outcomes beyond the effects of experienced mistreatment. The results demonstrate that observer psychological and behavioral deontic reactions are not straightforward. For example, while observers have negative reactions toward perpetrators, they fail to intervene and have mixed reactions toward targets. Findings from a series of moderator analyses illuminate the role of perpetrator rank, mistreatment severity, and study context in explaining these disparate observer deontic reactions. Further, although experienced mistreatment explains more variance in most employee outcomes than witnessed mistreatment, witnessed mistreatment still has a unique and sizable contribution. The implications of these findings and future directions for research on witnessed mistreatment are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.9,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142324989","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Salvatore J Affinito,David A Hofmann,Jonathan E Keeney
Organizational failures often cause significant harm to employees, the organization itself, and the environment. Investigations of failures consistently highlight how key employees behaved in (perhaps unintentionally) unethical ways that de-prioritized safety, such as investing fewer resources in safety (vs. other priorities) over time. Drawing on these investigations, we suggest a previously underexplored theme could explain why organizational failures persist and why employees did not "see" the potential for their behaviors to cause harm to others: Employees were distanced from where the harm eventually occurred, either in terms of space (e.g., being located miles away from the job site) or time (e.g., making decisions that would not have impacts for months or years). We use construal level theory to investigate how the way employees construe where work occurs-defined as work context construal-influences perceptions of harm and the ethical framing of risk-mitigating behaviors. We hypothesize that high-level (abstract) work context construals (vs. low-level, concrete ones) reduce perceptions of potential harm which, in turn, leads to framing risk-mitigating behaviors as less of an ethical obligation. Six studies-a correlational survey of aviation employees (Study 1), field experiments with offshore drilling employees (Study 2A) and health care workers (Study 2B), a preregistered experiment with nurses (Study 3), and two supplemental studies (Studies 4A/B)-support our hypotheses. We discuss implications of this research for understanding organizational failures, particularly in a world where technology increasingly enables employees to monitor complex and high-risk work occurring many miles away, or on the other side of the world. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"Out of sight, out of mind: How high-level construals can decrease the ethical framing of risk-mitigating behavior.","authors":"Salvatore J Affinito,David A Hofmann,Jonathan E Keeney","doi":"10.1037/apl0001219","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001219","url":null,"abstract":"Organizational failures often cause significant harm to employees, the organization itself, and the environment. Investigations of failures consistently highlight how key employees behaved in (perhaps unintentionally) unethical ways that de-prioritized safety, such as investing fewer resources in safety (vs. other priorities) over time. Drawing on these investigations, we suggest a previously underexplored theme could explain why organizational failures persist and why employees did not \"see\" the potential for their behaviors to cause harm to others: Employees were distanced from where the harm eventually occurred, either in terms of space (e.g., being located miles away from the job site) or time (e.g., making decisions that would not have impacts for months or years). We use construal level theory to investigate how the way employees construe where work occurs-defined as work context construal-influences perceptions of harm and the ethical framing of risk-mitigating behaviors. We hypothesize that high-level (abstract) work context construals (vs. low-level, concrete ones) reduce perceptions of potential harm which, in turn, leads to framing risk-mitigating behaviors as less of an ethical obligation. Six studies-a correlational survey of aviation employees (Study 1), field experiments with offshore drilling employees (Study 2A) and health care workers (Study 2B), a preregistered experiment with nurses (Study 3), and two supplemental studies (Studies 4A/B)-support our hypotheses. We discuss implications of this research for understanding organizational failures, particularly in a world where technology increasingly enables employees to monitor complex and high-risk work occurring many miles away, or on the other side of the world. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.9,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142324991","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Andrew C Loignon,John W Fleenor,Stephen Jeong,David J Woehr
Leadership scholars recognize that there is value in capturing how leaders view themselves and how they are viewed by others. Recently, the leadership Arena-Reputation-Identity (LARI) model has been advanced as a means of more precisely capturing the shared and unique perspectives that underlie multisource ratings of leadership. Despite its strengths, several critical questions pertaining to this model remain unanswered: (1) Does the wealth of information provided by the LARI model have any bearing on the effectiveness of a leader? (2) Does the amount of variance explained by a particular source within the LARI model depend on the observability of the leadership dimension being rated? (3) Does the LARI model generalize to the upper echelon of the firms (i.e., senior executives) while also accommodating additional source effects (i.e., board members)? Drawing on multisource ratings of 491 senior executives' leadership competencies, as well as a team-based assessment of their effectiveness, we first conceptually and empirically extend this Model 1 that can accommodate predictive relationships, that is, LARI (S-1) model, and then find that the LARI (S-1) model functions well as a means of conceptualizing multisource ratings of leadership (even in a distinct context and additional sources of ratings). We also find that the LARI (S-1) model captures a significant, and at times, substantial portion of variability in leader effectiveness. Our results also suggest that the extent to which a particular source of leadership ratings predicts a leader's effectiveness is based, in part, on the observability of the leadership dimension being assessed. Implications and future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"Does what others can(not) see really matter? The relationship between leadership Arena-Reputation-Identity (LARI) model and leader effectiveness.","authors":"Andrew C Loignon,John W Fleenor,Stephen Jeong,David J Woehr","doi":"10.1037/apl0001238","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001238","url":null,"abstract":"Leadership scholars recognize that there is value in capturing how leaders view themselves and how they are viewed by others. Recently, the leadership Arena-Reputation-Identity (LARI) model has been advanced as a means of more precisely capturing the shared and unique perspectives that underlie multisource ratings of leadership. Despite its strengths, several critical questions pertaining to this model remain unanswered: (1) Does the wealth of information provided by the LARI model have any bearing on the effectiveness of a leader? (2) Does the amount of variance explained by a particular source within the LARI model depend on the observability of the leadership dimension being rated? (3) Does the LARI model generalize to the upper echelon of the firms (i.e., senior executives) while also accommodating additional source effects (i.e., board members)? Drawing on multisource ratings of 491 senior executives' leadership competencies, as well as a team-based assessment of their effectiveness, we first conceptually and empirically extend this Model 1 that can accommodate predictive relationships, that is, LARI (S-1) model, and then find that the LARI (S-1) model functions well as a means of conceptualizing multisource ratings of leadership (even in a distinct context and additional sources of ratings). We also find that the LARI (S-1) model captures a significant, and at times, substantial portion of variability in leader effectiveness. Our results also suggest that the extent to which a particular source of leadership ratings predicts a leader's effectiveness is based, in part, on the observability of the leadership dimension being assessed. Implications and future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.9,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142324995","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Vijaya Venkataramani, Shuye Lu, Kathryn M Bartol, Xiaoming Zheng, Dan Ni
Employees' novel ideas often do not get recognized or valued by their managers, thus precluding these ideas from benefiting the organization. Drawing on the social-cognitive model of creativity evaluation (Zhou & Woodman, 2003) and integrating it with a social network (N/W) lens, this article investigates how characteristics of the social networks of managers and employees play a role in influencing managers' valuation of and willingness to implement novel employee ideas. In three studies-an experimental study manipulating idea novelty and the functional diversity of idea evaluators' (i.e., managers') network, and two network field studies (with managers evaluating actual product ideas generated by employees)-we document how managers generally disfavor novelty and, therefore, are unwilling to implement novel yet useful ideas. However, we find that managers' advice network diversity and employees' centrality in the advice network among their peers help mitigate this negative effect. Managers are able to better appreciate the value of novel ideas when they have more diverse networks and when idea-proposing employees have high centrality in their peer network. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
员工的新奇想法往往得不到管理者的认可或重视,从而使这些想法无法惠及组织。本文借鉴创造力评估的社会认知模型(Zhou & Woodman, 2003),并将其与社会网络(N/W)视角相结合,研究了管理者和员工的社会网络特征如何影响管理者对员工新颖创意的评价和实施意愿。在三项研究中--一项实验研究操纵了创意的新颖性和创意评估者(即管理者)网络的功能多样性,以及两项网络实地研究(由管理者评估员工产生的实际产品创意)--我们记录了管理者如何普遍不喜欢新颖性,因此不愿意实施新颖但有用的创意。然而,我们发现,管理者建议网络的多样性和员工在同侪建议网络中的中心地位有助于减轻这种负面影响。如果管理者的建议网络更具多样性,而且提出建议的员工在其同行网络中具有较高的中心地位,那么他们就能更好地欣赏新颖想法的价值。本文讨论了这些发现的理论和实践意义。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Seeing value in novelty: Manager and employee social networks as keys in managers' idea evaluation and implementation decisions.","authors":"Vijaya Venkataramani, Shuye Lu, Kathryn M Bartol, Xiaoming Zheng, Dan Ni","doi":"10.1037/apl0001227","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001227","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Employees' novel ideas often do not get recognized or valued by their managers, thus precluding these ideas from benefiting the organization. Drawing on the social-cognitive model of creativity evaluation (Zhou & Woodman, 2003) and integrating it with a social network (N/W) lens, this article investigates how characteristics of the social networks of managers and employees play a role in influencing managers' valuation of and willingness to implement novel employee ideas. In three studies-an experimental study manipulating idea novelty and the functional diversity of idea evaluators' (i.e., managers') network, and two network field studies (with managers evaluating actual product ideas generated by employees)-we document how managers generally disfavor novelty and, therefore, are unwilling to implement novel yet useful ideas. However, we find that managers' advice network diversity and employees' centrality in the advice network among their peers help mitigate this negative effect. Managers are able to better appreciate the value of novel ideas when they have more diverse networks and when idea-proposing employees have high centrality in their peer network. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142287977","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Elisabeth R Silver, Mikki Hebl, Frederick L Oswald
Organizations increasingly recognize the importance of including neurodivergent people (e.g., those with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD], autism, dyslexia) in the workforce. However, research suggests that some selection tools (e.g., measures of conscientiousness) show lower means for those with ADHD, which may carry implications for personnel selection. The three studies reported here address three questions: (1) What is the magnitude of ADHD-based differences in conscientiousness, and are these differences driven by facets with high or low job relevance? (2) Could reframing conscientiousness items within work contexts attenuate group mean differences in conscientiousness? And (3) do work-specific and general conscientiousness measures have different measurement properties for respondents with ADHD? Study 1 surveyed 291 undergraduates, finding those with ADHD scored significantly lower on global conscientiousness and its facets. Study 2 (a mixed-design experiment) had 317 employees complete a work-specific and a decontextualized set of conscientiousness items. Using work-specific conscientiousness items reduced differences in conscientiousness by ADHD status. Study 3 (a between-subjects design, N = 515) experimentally increased the stakes of survey administration to approximate a selection context. Mean differences by ADHD status were present on both work-specific and general items for global conscientiousness and most facets, even under high stakes. However, these results are qualified by findings of measurement noninvariance on general and work-specific conscientiousness facet measures, suggesting scale mean differences by ADHD status may be driven by item content rather than construct-level differences. Together, the findings reinforce a need for ongoing investigation into the implications of using conscientiousness assessments with neurodivergent people. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"Conscientiousness assessments for people with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Measurement properties and potential issues.","authors":"Elisabeth R Silver, Mikki Hebl, Frederick L Oswald","doi":"10.1037/apl0001235","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001235","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Organizations increasingly recognize the importance of including neurodivergent people (e.g., those with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD], autism, dyslexia) in the workforce. However, research suggests that some selection tools (e.g., measures of conscientiousness) show lower means for those with ADHD, which may carry implications for personnel selection. The three studies reported here address three questions: (1) What is the magnitude of ADHD-based differences in conscientiousness, and are these differences driven by facets with high or low job relevance? (2) Could reframing conscientiousness items within work contexts attenuate group mean differences in conscientiousness? And (3) do work-specific and general conscientiousness measures have different measurement properties for respondents with ADHD? Study 1 surveyed 291 undergraduates, finding those with ADHD scored significantly lower on global conscientiousness and its facets. Study 2 (a mixed-design experiment) had 317 employees complete a work-specific and a decontextualized set of conscientiousness items. Using work-specific conscientiousness items reduced differences in conscientiousness by ADHD status. Study 3 (a between-subjects design, <i>N</i> = 515) experimentally increased the stakes of survey administration to approximate a selection context. Mean differences by ADHD status were present on both work-specific and general items for global conscientiousness and most facets, even under high stakes. However, these results are qualified by findings of measurement noninvariance on general and work-specific conscientiousness facet measures, suggesting scale mean differences by ADHD status may be driven by item content rather than construct-level differences. Together, the findings reinforce a need for ongoing investigation into the implications of using conscientiousness assessments with neurodivergent people. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142287976","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Zihan Liu,Kevin A Hoff,Chu Chu,Frederick L Oswald,James Rounds
Measuring person-occupation fit serves many important purposes, from helping young people explore majors and careers to helping jobseekers assess fit with available jobs. However, most existing fit measures are limited in that they focus on single individual difference domains without considering how fit may differ across multiple domains. For example, a jobseeker might be highly interested in a job, yet not possess the requisite skills or knowledge to perform the job well. The current research addresses this issue by evaluating an integrative set of person-occupation fit assessments that measure 88 fit dimensions across five domains: vocational interests, work values, knowledge, skills, and personality. These measures were either newly developed or adapted from existing assessments to directly correspond with occupational variables from the Occupational Information Network database. Across three studies with diverse samples, we obtained extensive reliability and validity evidence to evaluate the fit assessments. Results consistently showed that integrating across fit domains led to practical improvements in predictions of relevant outcomes, including career choice and subjective and objective career success. However, some fit measures (i.e., interests and knowledge) were generally more predictive of outcomes than others (i.e., personality), thus warranting greater consideration for use in research and applied contexts. We discuss how our results advance theoretical and practical knowledge concerning the measurement of person-occupation fit in the modern labor market. Moreover, to inspire additional research and applications involving whole-person fit measurement, we made all newly developed fit assessments publicly available, providing guidance for using them with the Occupational Information Network database. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"Toward whole-person fit assessment: Integrating interests, values, skills, knowledge, and personality using the Occupational Information Network (O*NET).","authors":"Zihan Liu,Kevin A Hoff,Chu Chu,Frederick L Oswald,James Rounds","doi":"10.1037/apl0001232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001232","url":null,"abstract":"Measuring person-occupation fit serves many important purposes, from helping young people explore majors and careers to helping jobseekers assess fit with available jobs. However, most existing fit measures are limited in that they focus on single individual difference domains without considering how fit may differ across multiple domains. For example, a jobseeker might be highly interested in a job, yet not possess the requisite skills or knowledge to perform the job well. The current research addresses this issue by evaluating an integrative set of person-occupation fit assessments that measure 88 fit dimensions across five domains: vocational interests, work values, knowledge, skills, and personality. These measures were either newly developed or adapted from existing assessments to directly correspond with occupational variables from the Occupational Information Network database. Across three studies with diverse samples, we obtained extensive reliability and validity evidence to evaluate the fit assessments. Results consistently showed that integrating across fit domains led to practical improvements in predictions of relevant outcomes, including career choice and subjective and objective career success. However, some fit measures (i.e., interests and knowledge) were generally more predictive of outcomes than others (i.e., personality), thus warranting greater consideration for use in research and applied contexts. We discuss how our results advance theoretical and practical knowledge concerning the measurement of person-occupation fit in the modern labor market. Moreover, to inspire additional research and applications involving whole-person fit measurement, we made all newly developed fit assessments publicly available, providing guidance for using them with the Occupational Information Network database. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.9,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142165984","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-01Epub Date: 2024-02-15DOI: 10.1037/apl0001169
Yufei Zhong, David M Sluss, Katie L Badura
Although subordinate-to-supervisor relational identification (RI) has gained significant scholarly attention in organizational research, an understanding of its nomological network is incomplete. There have also been recurring discussions about its distinctions with another more extensively researched relational construct-leader-member exchange (LMX). In this meta-analysis, we expand Sluss and Ashforth's (2007) typology, going beyond the influence of the supervisor, to systematically study the antecedents and consequences of RI and its comparison with LMX. Meta-analytic results based on 157 independent samples demonstrate that positive leader behaviors that span role-based and person-based identities (e.g., transformational leadership, supervisor humility) are important antecedents of subordinate-to-supervisor RI, with effects contingent on subordinates' national culture (i.e., collectivism and power distance). Although less hypothesized, relational and organizational contexts as well as subordinate characteristics are also important antecedents of subordinate-to-supervisor RI. The results further show that RI relates to important subordinate behaviors and attitudes. Finally, we test how RI and LMX have differing effects across these important subordinate attitudes and behaviors. We conclude with suggestions to enhance our understanding of RI. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
尽管下属对上司的关系认同(RI)在组织研究中获得了学者们的极大关注,但对其名义网络的理解却并不完整。关于它与另一种研究更为广泛的关系结构--领导成员交换(LMX)之间的区别,也一直存在讨论。在这项元分析中,我们扩展了 Sluss 和 Ashforth(2007 年)的类型学,超越了上司的影响,系统地研究了 RI 的前因后果及其与 LMX 的比较。基于 157 个独立样本的元分析结果表明,跨越角色身份和个人身份的积极领导者行为(如变革型领导、上司谦逊)是下属对上司关系形成的重要前因,其影响取决于下属的民族文化(即集体主义和权力距离)。虽然假设较少,但关系和组织背景以及下属特征也是下属对上司关系指数的重要前因。研究结果进一步表明,RI 与下属的重要行为和态度有关。最后,我们检验了 RI 和 LMX 如何对这些重要的下属态度和行为产生不同的影响。最后,我们提出了一些建议,以加深我们对 RI 的理解。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Subordinate-to-supervisor relational identification: A meta-analytic review.","authors":"Yufei Zhong, David M Sluss, Katie L Badura","doi":"10.1037/apl0001169","DOIUrl":"10.1037/apl0001169","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although subordinate-to-supervisor relational identification (RI) has gained significant scholarly attention in organizational research, an understanding of its nomological network is incomplete. There have also been recurring discussions about its distinctions with another more extensively researched relational construct-leader-member exchange (LMX). In this meta-analysis, we expand Sluss and Ashforth's (2007) typology, going beyond the influence of the supervisor, to systematically study the antecedents and consequences of RI and its comparison with LMX. Meta-analytic results based on 157 independent samples demonstrate that positive leader behaviors that span role-based and person-based identities (e.g., transformational leadership, supervisor humility) are important antecedents of subordinate-to-supervisor RI, with effects contingent on subordinates' national culture (i.e., collectivism and power distance). Although less hypothesized, relational and organizational contexts as well as subordinate characteristics are also important antecedents of subordinate-to-supervisor RI. The results further show that RI relates to important subordinate behaviors and attitudes. Finally, we test how RI and LMX have differing effects across these important subordinate attitudes and behaviors. We conclude with suggestions to enhance our understanding of RI. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1431-1460"},"PeriodicalIF":9.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139735243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}