Dhanani and colleagues (2022) rightfully acknowledge the stressful nature of policing as an occupation and highlight the need to promote officer well-being, yet the authors and other scholars underestimate the role of trauma and the potential impact it has on nearly all aspects of policing. Trauma is not merely stress as industrial-organizational (I-O) and occupational health psychologists typically study it; it emerges from “an event, series of events, or set of circumstances, that is experienced by an individual as physically or emotionally harmful or life-threatening and that has lasting adverse effects on the individual’s functioning and mental, physical, social, emotional, or spiritual well-being” (SAMHSA, 2014, p. 7). The nature of police officers’ jobs requires them to experience chronic exposure to potentially psychologically traumatic events (PPTEs), that is, direct or indirect exposure to actual or threatened death, serious injury or sexual violence (APA, 2013). Moreover, police agencies’ organizational cultures are often unsupportive at best (Dhanani et al.), and officers report very high levels of other organizational stressors including inconsistent leadership styles, bureaucratic red tape, lack of resources, unfair/inconsistent personnel practices, unsupportive peers, and unfair workload distributions (Bikos, 2020; Carleton et al., 2020; Ricciardelli et al., 2020). Organizational stressors are such a problem in policing that they are even more strongly associated with mental health disorders than are operational stressors, even after controlling for exposure to PPTEs (Carleton et al., 2020). This confluence of conditions is the perfect recipe for the onset of posttraumatic stress injuries (PTSIs), including posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and subclinical markers of trauma, both of which are abundant among police (Syed et al., 2020). Indeed, police and other public safety personnel have an estimated 20–37% PTSD prevalence rate, compared to the general population at 3.5% (APA, 2013; Marmar et al., 2006). I-O psychologists may be prone to dismissing trauma and these statistics because they seem to belong within the domain of clinical psychology, yet we assert that it is essential for I-O psychologists to incorporate clinical and neurobiological evidence on trauma if we aim to contribute to the science and practice of impacting police misconduct. Moreover, we believe that interdisciplinary collaborations—such as those among I-O psychologists, clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, and neurobiologists—are essential to address the complex problem of how to reduce racialized violence and other forms of police misconduct. We thus begin with a brief overview of the neurobiological nature of trauma before outlining a trauma-informed approach.
Dhanani及其同事(2022)正确地承认了警察作为一种职业的压力性质，并强调了促进警察福祉的必要性，但作者和其他学者低估了创伤的作用及其对警务工作几乎所有方面的潜在影响。创伤不仅仅是工业组织(I-O)和职业健康心理学家通常研究的压力;它出现在“一个事件，一系列事件，或一组情况，对个人的身体或情感有害或危及生命，并对个人的功能和精神，身体，社会，情感或精神健康产生持久的不利影响”(SAMHSA, 2014, p. 7)。警察工作的性质要求他们长期暴露于潜在的心理创伤事件(ppte)，也就是说，直接或间接遭受实际或威胁的死亡、重伤或性暴力(APA, 2013年)。此外，警察机构的组织文化往往是不支持的(Dhanani等人)，警察报告的其他组织压力源水平非常高，包括不一致的领导风格、官僚主义的繁文缛节、缺乏资源、不公平/不一致的人事实践、不支持的同伴和不公平的工作量分配(Bikos, 2020;卡尔顿等人，2020;Ricciardelli et al.， 2020)。组织压力源在警务中是一个问题，即使在控制了暴露于ppte之后，它们与精神健康障碍的关联甚至比操作压力源更强(卡尔顿等人，2020)。这些条件的融合是创伤后应激性损伤(PTSIs)发病的完美处方，包括创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)和创伤的亚临床标志，这两者在警察中都很丰富(Syed et al.， 2020)。事实上，警察和其他公共安全人员的PTSD患病率估计为20-37%，而普通人群的患病率为3.5% (APA, 2013;Marmar et al.， 2006)。I-O心理学家可能倾向于忽视创伤和这些统计数据，因为它们似乎属于临床心理学领域，但我们断言，如果我们的目标是为影响警察不当行为的科学和实践做出贡献，I-O心理学家就有必要将创伤的临床和神经生物学证据结合起来。此外，我们认为跨学科的合作——比如io心理学家、临床心理学家、精神病学家和神经生物学家之间的合作——对于解决如何减少种族暴力和其他形式的警察不当行为这一复杂问题至关重要。因此，在概述创伤知情方法之前，我们首先简要概述创伤的神经生物学性质。
{"title":"A trauma-informed approach is needed to reduce police misconduct","authors":"Jana L. Raver, Megan McElheran","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.82","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.82","url":null,"abstract":"Dhanani and colleagues (2022) rightfully acknowledge the stressful nature of policing as an occupation and highlight the need to promote officer well-being, yet the authors and other scholars underestimate the role of trauma and the potential impact it has on nearly all aspects of policing. Trauma is not merely stress as industrial-organizational (I-O) and occupational health psychologists typically study it; it emerges from “an event, series of events, or set of circumstances, that is experienced by an individual as physically or emotionally harmful or life-threatening and that has lasting adverse effects on the individual’s functioning and mental, physical, social, emotional, or spiritual well-being” (SAMHSA, 2014, p. 7). The nature of police officers’ jobs requires them to experience chronic exposure to potentially psychologically traumatic events (PPTEs), that is, direct or indirect exposure to actual or threatened death, serious injury or sexual violence (APA, 2013). Moreover, police agencies’ organizational cultures are often unsupportive at best (Dhanani et al.), and officers report very high levels of other organizational stressors including inconsistent leadership styles, bureaucratic red tape, lack of resources, unfair/inconsistent personnel practices, unsupportive peers, and unfair workload distributions (Bikos, 2020; Carleton et al., 2020; Ricciardelli et al., 2020). Organizational stressors are such a problem in policing that they are even more strongly associated with mental health disorders than are operational stressors, even after controlling for exposure to PPTEs (Carleton et al., 2020). This confluence of conditions is the perfect recipe for the onset of posttraumatic stress injuries (PTSIs), including posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and subclinical markers of trauma, both of which are abundant among police (Syed et al., 2020). Indeed, police and other public safety personnel have an estimated 20–37% PTSD prevalence rate, compared to the general population at 3.5% (APA, 2013; Marmar et al., 2006). I-O psychologists may be prone to dismissing trauma and these statistics because they seem to belong within the domain of clinical psychology, yet we assert that it is essential for I-O psychologists to incorporate clinical and neurobiological evidence on trauma if we aim to contribute to the science and practice of impacting police misconduct. Moreover, we believe that interdisciplinary collaborations—such as those among I-O psychologists, clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, and neurobiologists—are essential to address the complex problem of how to reduce racialized violence and other forms of police misconduct. We thus begin with a brief overview of the neurobiological nature of trauma before outlining a trauma-informed approach.","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47050292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Formal succession planning is rare in the federal government compared to private sector organizations because there are multiple unique challenges in government. The Federal Merit System Principles and the Prohibited Personnel Practices established in Title 5 of the U.S. Code substantially limit flexibility in employee development and promotions, both key aspects of succession planning. For example, the merit system principle, “Recruit, select, and advance on merit after fair and open competition” prohibits the common succession planning practice of senior leaders personally identifying promising employees, providing them with special opportunities for development, and then promoting them into critical positions. This approach does not allow for fair and open competition and is thus seen as providing unfair advantages to some employees.
{"title":"Innovation in government succession planning: A case study","authors":"Anne F. Marrelli","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.63","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.63","url":null,"abstract":"Formal succession planning is rare in the federal government compared to private sector organizations because there are multiple unique challenges in government. The Federal Merit System Principles and the Prohibited Personnel Practices established in Title 5 of the U.S. Code substantially limit flexibility in employee development and promotions, both key aspects of succession planning. For example, the merit system principle, “Recruit, select, and advance on merit after fair and open competition” prohibits the common succession planning practice of senior leaders personally identifying promising employees, providing them with special opportunities for development, and then promoting them into critical positions. This approach does not allow for fair and open competition and is thus seen as providing unfair advantages to some employees.","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45528786","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this commentary, my objective is to expand the perspective presented by Dhanani et al. (2022) by highlighting a key challenge associated with law enforcement and police patrols: Police officers have to adapt to unexpected, complex, and highly dynamic contexts not just individually but also as a team. I therefore believe that it is essential to invoke theoretical perspectives that consider the so-called action team context in policing and its implications for racial bias and resulting police violence. Additionally, interventions designed to prevent racialized police violence must take into account specific team processes potentially affecting unwanted and dangerous on-the-job behavior. In the following, I first define action teams in complex environments and point to relevant team processes (i.e., communication and decision making) in this context. Second, I propose simulation-based training and team reflexivity (TR) as useful team-based interventions that target communication and team decision making, and thus may present useful evidence-based and practical tools to address and reduce racialized police violence.
{"title":"The critical role of team processes and team reflexivity in the emergence and prevention of racialized police violence","authors":"Mona Weiss","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.77","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.77","url":null,"abstract":"In this commentary, my objective is to expand the perspective presented by Dhanani et al. (2022) by highlighting a key challenge associated with law enforcement and police patrols: Police officers have to adapt to unexpected, complex, and highly dynamic contexts not just individually but also as a team. I therefore believe that it is essential to invoke theoretical perspectives that consider the so-called action team context in policing and its implications for racial bias and resulting police violence. Additionally, interventions designed to prevent racialized police violence must take into account specific team processes potentially affecting unwanted and dangerous on-the-job behavior. In the following, I first define action teams in complex environments and point to relevant team processes (i.e., communication and decision making) in this context. Second, I propose simulation-based training and team reflexivity (TR) as useful team-based interventions that target communication and team decision making, and thus may present useful evidence-based and practical tools to address and reduce racialized police violence.","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48941879","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Dhanani et al. (2022) highlight limitations with the personality measures typically used for police selection, but they overlooked aspects of personality that may be critical for police officer selection and training. As Dhanani et al. noted, law enforcement agencies rely too heavily on personality measures that are not optimized to predict behaviors critical to effective policework. For example, clinical measures target chronic, extreme disorders and have a limited ability to reflect additional problematic behaviors that occur infrequently or only under some circumstances. Further, organizational psychologists have emphasized potential legal constraints associated with assessing clinical disorders in selection (Melson-Silimon et al., 2019). Other frequently used personality assessments targeted at the normal range of behavior, such as measures based on the five factor model, may predict some components of police performance (e.g., Black, 2000; Detrick & Chibnall, 2006; Forero et al., 2009; Hogan, 1971; Hogan & Kurtines, 1975; Winterberg et al., in press) better than clinical personality measures (Varela et al., 2004), but still fall short in the prediction of behaviors and decisions in less frequent, high-threat situations. Although rarer, these situations are of greater concern when evaluating police performance and outcomes as they potentially have life-threatening consequences for both officers and civilians, and have been identified as critical instances when adverse effects on minorities are most likely to occur. However, going unmentioned in Dhanani et al. are subclinical dark personality measures, often referred to as derailers in work settings, that are specifically designed to address deficiencies in both clinical and normal-range personality measures (Guenole, 2014; Spain et al., 2014). Subclinical traits are personality tendencies that are frequently interpersonally aversive but are not necessarily dysfunctional at a level that would require clinical interventions. Rather, these tendencies represent potentially toxic strategies for dealing with frustrations and advancing one’s own agenda (Hogan et al., 2021). Consequently, derailers frequently manifest as important predictors of behavior in high-stress situations or when individuals feel little need to self-monitor their behaviors (Spain et al., 2016; Harms, 2022). Derailers are thus relevant to law enforcement work because it is characterized by regular exposure to high-stress environments, ambiguous situations requiring quick decisions, and primary and secondary trauma. Indeed, both police subject matter experts and samples of the US public agree that many subclinical traits are important for successful police performance (Winterberg et al., in press). Many applied personality researchers are familiar with the dark triad (i.e., narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy). However, measures of subclinical traits used in selection settings, such as the Hogan Development Survey (Hog
Dhanani等人(2022)强调了通常用于警察选拔的人格测量的局限性，但他们忽视了可能对警察选拔和培训至关重要的人格方面。正如Dhanani等人所指出的那样，执法机构过于依赖人格测量，而这些人格测量并未优化，无法预测对有效警务工作至关重要的行为。例如，临床措施针对的是慢性、极端障碍，反映不经常发生或仅在某些情况下发生的其他问题行为的能力有限。此外，组织心理学家强调了与评估临床选择障碍相关的潜在法律约束(Melson-Silimon et al.， 2019)。其他经常使用的针对正常行为范围的人格评估，如基于五因素模型的测量，可以预测警察表现的某些组成部分(例如，Black, 2000;Detrick & Chibnall, 2006;foreo et al.， 2009;霍根,1971;Hogan & Kurtines, 1975;Winterberg et al.， in press)比临床人格测量(Varela et al.， 2004)更好，但在预测不太频繁、高威胁情况下的行为和决策方面仍然不足。虽然这种情况比较罕见，但在评估警察的表现和结果时，这些情况更值得关注，因为它们可能对警察和平民造成危及生命的后果，并且已被确定为最可能发生对少数民族不利影响的关键情况。然而，Dhanani等人没有提到的是亚临床黑暗人格测量，通常被称为工作环境中的脱轨者，专门用于解决临床和正常范围人格测量中的缺陷(Guenole, 2014;西班牙等人，2014)。亚临床特征是人格倾向，经常是人际厌恶，但不一定是功能失调的水平，需要临床干预。相反，这些倾向代表了处理挫折和推进自己议程的潜在有毒策略(Hogan等人，2021)。因此，在高压力情况下，或者当个体觉得不需要自我监控自己的行为时，脱轨者经常表现为重要的行为预测因素(西班牙等人，2016;伤害,2022)。因此，脱轨者与执法工作相关，因为它的特点是经常暴露于高压力环境，需要快速决策的模糊情况，以及原发性和继发性创伤。事实上，警察主题专家和美国公众样本都同意，许多亚临床特征对成功的警察表现很重要(Winterberg等人，出版中)。许多应用人格研究者都熟悉黑暗三位一体(即自恋、马基雅维利主义和精神病)。然而，在选择设置中使用的亚临床特征的测量，如Hogan发展调查(Hogan & Hogan, 2009)，包括更广泛的亚临床特征，这些特征与DSM-IV轴-2人格障碍密切相关，并捕捉到偏执狂、情绪爆发、不诚实的顺从和被动攻击行为的亚临床倾向。亚临床黑暗特征评估对执法人员的选择具有重要的优势。现有证据表明，脱轨倾向的基本比率相对较高
{"title":"Investigating the dark side of personality: A case for derailer assessment in police","authors":"Chase A. Winterberg, P. Harms","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.76","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.76","url":null,"abstract":"Dhanani et al. (2022) highlight limitations with the personality measures typically used for police selection, but they overlooked aspects of personality that may be critical for police officer selection and training. As Dhanani et al. noted, law enforcement agencies rely too heavily on personality measures that are not optimized to predict behaviors critical to effective policework. For example, clinical measures target chronic, extreme disorders and have a limited ability to reflect additional problematic behaviors that occur infrequently or only under some circumstances. Further, organizational psychologists have emphasized potential legal constraints associated with assessing clinical disorders in selection (Melson-Silimon et al., 2019). Other frequently used personality assessments targeted at the normal range of behavior, such as measures based on the five factor model, may predict some components of police performance (e.g., Black, 2000; Detrick & Chibnall, 2006; Forero et al., 2009; Hogan, 1971; Hogan & Kurtines, 1975; Winterberg et al., in press) better than clinical personality measures (Varela et al., 2004), but still fall short in the prediction of behaviors and decisions in less frequent, high-threat situations. Although rarer, these situations are of greater concern when evaluating police performance and outcomes as they potentially have life-threatening consequences for both officers and civilians, and have been identified as critical instances when adverse effects on minorities are most likely to occur. However, going unmentioned in Dhanani et al. are subclinical dark personality measures, often referred to as derailers in work settings, that are specifically designed to address deficiencies in both clinical and normal-range personality measures (Guenole, 2014; Spain et al., 2014). Subclinical traits are personality tendencies that are frequently interpersonally aversive but are not necessarily dysfunctional at a level that would require clinical interventions. Rather, these tendencies represent potentially toxic strategies for dealing with frustrations and advancing one’s own agenda (Hogan et al., 2021). Consequently, derailers frequently manifest as important predictors of behavior in high-stress situations or when individuals feel little need to self-monitor their behaviors (Spain et al., 2016; Harms, 2022). Derailers are thus relevant to law enforcement work because it is characterized by regular exposure to high-stress environments, ambiguous situations requiring quick decisions, and primary and secondary trauma. Indeed, both police subject matter experts and samples of the US public agree that many subclinical traits are important for successful police performance (Winterberg et al., in press). Many applied personality researchers are familiar with the dark triad (i.e., narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy). However, measures of subclinical traits used in selection settings, such as the Hogan Development Survey (Hog","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47106627","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Dhanani et al. (2022) review a compelling and sobering body of evidence regarding police-initiated violence, with a focus on racism and disparate impact on the Black community. We agree with the authors that racialized police-initiated violence is a major systemic issue that can
{"title":"Officer-involved domestic violence: A call for action among I-O psychologists","authors":"Kimberly A. French, Keaton A. Fletcher","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.74","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.74","url":null,"abstract":"Dhanani et al. (2022) review a compelling and sobering body of evidence regarding police-initiated violence, with a focus on racism and disparate impact on the Black community. We agree with the authors that racialized police-initiated violence is a major systemic issue that can","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47501684","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Oliver Weigelt, Kimberly A. French, J. de Bloom, Carolin Dietz, Michael D. Knoll, Jana Kühnel, Laurenz L. Meier, Roman Prem, Shani Pindek, Antje Schmitt, Christine J. Syrek, F. Rink
,
,
{"title":"Moving from opposition to taking ownership of open science to make discoveries that matter","authors":"Oliver Weigelt, Kimberly A. French, J. de Bloom, Carolin Dietz, Michael D. Knoll, Jana Kühnel, Laurenz L. Meier, Roman Prem, Shani Pindek, Antje Schmitt, Christine J. Syrek, F. Rink","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.66","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.66","url":null,"abstract":",","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49191871","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Reading Guzzo, Schneider, and Nalbantian’s (2022) paper on the unintended consequences of open science policies reminds me of the classic Steven Kerr (1995) paper “On the Folly of Rewarding A, While Hoping for B” in which he makes the point that often we fail to consider the reward systems when we attempt to influence behavior. Such is the case, it seems to me, with the open science movement. Its solution to questionable research practices is to create a system of journal policies that focuses on individual researcher behavior rather than the reward systems that produce it. It is based on an implicit assumption that open science policies prevent questionable research practices and even outright research fraud. Without reforming the reward structure, however, such an outcome is highly unlikely. There are two classes of behavior that open science approaches are designed to reduce: research fraud and questionable research practices. Both arise under a system in which career outcomes are determined by publication in a limited number of exclusive academic outlets. Many departments, particularly in business schools, require publication in a small list of elite “A” journals. Those journals have very narrow requirements that include, as Guzzo et al. note, theory and hypotheses that are confirmed by data. Failure to confirm hypotheses in a paper makes it difficult if not impossible to publish in the places that make one competitive on the academic job market, earn tenure, and reap other rewards (e.g., financial bonuses and reduced teaching loads). Researcher career rewards are based on publishing in the “right” places. Publication rewards (acceptance in top journals) are dependent on not only having theory, hypothesis, and confirmation, but also in convincing reviewers that a given submitted article makes a significant contribution. This means not only filling some perceived gap in the literature but being seen as novel in some way. Finding results that seem counterintuitive can be a good novelty strategy, but they are hard to realize without using a few research tricks. This reward structure—what it takes for career and publication success—puts researchers under tremendous pressure to survive professionally in a cut-throat and hypercompetitive environment where journal acceptance rates in top outlets are about 5%, and authors must fight reviewers over trivial issues through multiple rounds of review. Should we be surprised that so many researchers, facing the dilemma of either gaming the system or finding a different line of work, choose the questionable route? I find myself skeptical that a new set of requirements on researchers will produce a different result.
{"title":"Is open science rewarding A while hoping for B?","authors":"Paul E. Spector","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.64","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.64","url":null,"abstract":"Reading Guzzo, Schneider, and Nalbantian’s (2022) paper on the unintended consequences of open science policies reminds me of the classic Steven Kerr (1995) paper “On the Folly of Rewarding A, While Hoping for B” in which he makes the point that often we fail to consider the reward systems when we attempt to influence behavior. Such is the case, it seems to me, with the open science movement. Its solution to questionable research practices is to create a system of journal policies that focuses on individual researcher behavior rather than the reward systems that produce it. It is based on an implicit assumption that open science policies prevent questionable research practices and even outright research fraud. Without reforming the reward structure, however, such an outcome is highly unlikely. There are two classes of behavior that open science approaches are designed to reduce: research fraud and questionable research practices. Both arise under a system in which career outcomes are determined by publication in a limited number of exclusive academic outlets. Many departments, particularly in business schools, require publication in a small list of elite “A” journals. Those journals have very narrow requirements that include, as Guzzo et al. note, theory and hypotheses that are confirmed by data. Failure to confirm hypotheses in a paper makes it difficult if not impossible to publish in the places that make one competitive on the academic job market, earn tenure, and reap other rewards (e.g., financial bonuses and reduced teaching loads). Researcher career rewards are based on publishing in the “right” places. Publication rewards (acceptance in top journals) are dependent on not only having theory, hypothesis, and confirmation, but also in convincing reviewers that a given submitted article makes a significant contribution. This means not only filling some perceived gap in the literature but being seen as novel in some way. Finding results that seem counterintuitive can be a good novelty strategy, but they are hard to realize without using a few research tricks. This reward structure—what it takes for career and publication success—puts researchers under tremendous pressure to survive professionally in a cut-throat and hypercompetitive environment where journal acceptance rates in top outlets are about 5%, and authors must fight reviewers over trivial issues through multiple rounds of review. Should we be surprised that so many researchers, facing the dilemma of either gaming the system or finding a different line of work, choose the questionable route? I find myself skeptical that a new set of requirements on researchers will produce a different result.","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46318564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
white group of laborers, while they received a low wage, were compensated in part by a sort of public and psychological wage. They were given public deference and titles of courtesy because they were white. They were admitted freely with all classes of white people to public functions, public parks
{"title":"Defunding is refunding: Community investments, not policing, create safety","authors":"Christopher J. Waterbury, N. A. Smith","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.83","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.83","url":null,"abstract":"white group of laborers, while they received a low wage, were compensated in part by a sort of public and psychological wage. They were given public deference and titles of courtesy because they were white. They were admitted freely with all classes of white people to public functions, public parks","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46611598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
There is no doubt: Cybervetting is now recruiters’ everyday routine (Berkelaar & Buzzanell, 2015; Hartwell & Campion, 2020). Thus, we could not agree more with Wilcox et al. (2022) that it is important to address the considerable gap between cybervetting practice and research, especially concerning its validity. Their article is a wake-up call that most questions in this issue are still unanswered. We see the point of their distinct skepticism and agree that the validity of cybervetting is unproven. Nonetheless, we argue that this chapter needs a closer look before cybervetting is said to have “dubious effectiveness” (Wilcox et al., 2022, p. X), leads to “dampened productivity” (p. X), and “limits freedom of expression” (p. X). Although there is good reason to be cautious, we put into question whether cybervetting is an “unreflective activity undertaken by individual hiring agents within organizations that alternately ignore or encourage it” (p. X). Many researchers have warned about the risks of cybervetting early on (e.g., Brown & Vaughn, 2011; Caers & Castelyns, 2011; Davison et al., 2011); job candidates report intentions to withdraw applications (Schneider et al., 2015; Suen, 2018) and sue organizations (Stoughton et al., 2015) if cybervetting is used. Recruiters also report ambiguity about this practice (e.g., Hoek et al., 2016; McDonald et al., 2021; Pike et al., 2018). Rather than stakeholders “uncritically” (Wilcox et al., 2022, p. X) accepting cybervetting, we see a vivid debate. Social media (SM) platforms might be a modern, easily available, less faked, and economic source for first impressions of applicants’ traits, replacing traditional resumés (Davison et al., 2011; Landers & Schmidt, 2016)—if there is evidence for its validity. The debate started when Davison et al. (2011), Roth et al. (2016), and Landers and Schmidt (2016) provided mixed conclusions about cybervetting validity. Following, we shine a light on previous findings regarding cybervetting’s validity, deepen the still unknowns, and call for further action.
毫无疑问：网络审查现在是招聘人员的日常工作（Berkelaar和Buzzanell，2015；Hartwell和Campion，2020）。因此，我们非常同意Wilcox等人的观点。（2022）认为，解决网络审查实践与研究之间的巨大差距很重要，尤其是在其有效性方面。他们的文章敲响了警钟，这个问题中的大多数问题仍然没有答案。我们看到了他们明显怀疑的观点，并同意网络审查的有效性尚未得到证实。尽管如此，我们认为，在网络审查被认为具有“可疑的有效性”（Wilcox et al.，2022，p.X）、导致“生产力下降”（p.X）和“限制言论自由”（p.X）之前，本章需要仔细研究。尽管有充分的理由保持谨慎，但我们质疑网络审查是否是“由组织内的个人招聘代理进行的一种非反思性活动，而这些代理要么忽视，要么鼓励”（第十页）。许多研究人员在早期就警告过网络审查的风险（例如，Brown&Vaughn，2011；Caers&Castelyns，2011；Davison等人，2011）；求职者报告称，如果使用网络审查，他们打算撤回申请（Schneider等人，2015；Suen，2018）并起诉组织（Stoughton等人，2015）。招聘人员也报告了对这种做法的模糊性（例如，Hoek等人，2016；McDonald等人，2021；Pike等人，2018）。我们看到的不是利益相关者“不加批判”地接受网络审查（Wilcox等人，2022，第X页），而是一场生动的辩论。社交媒体（SM）平台可能是一种现代的、容易获得的、不那么伪造的、对申请人特征的第一印象的经济来源，取代了传统的简历（Davison et al.，2011；Landers&Schmidt，2016）——如果有证据证明其有效性的话。当Davison等人（2011）、Roth等人（2016）以及Landers和Schmidt（2016）对网络审查的有效性得出了喜忧参半的结论时，争论就开始了。接下来，我们将阐明之前关于网络审查有效性的调查结果，加深仍然未知的问题，并呼吁采取进一步行动。
{"title":"Too early to call: What we do (not) know about the validity of cybervetting","authors":"F. W. Mönke, Philipp Schäpers","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.51","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.51","url":null,"abstract":"There is no doubt: Cybervetting is now recruiters’ everyday routine (Berkelaar & Buzzanell, 2015; Hartwell & Campion, 2020). Thus, we could not agree more with Wilcox et al. (2022) that it is important to address the considerable gap between cybervetting practice and research, especially concerning its validity. Their article is a wake-up call that most questions in this issue are still unanswered. We see the point of their distinct skepticism and agree that the validity of cybervetting is unproven. Nonetheless, we argue that this chapter needs a closer look before cybervetting is said to have “dubious effectiveness” (Wilcox et al., 2022, p. X), leads to “dampened productivity” (p. X), and “limits freedom of expression” (p. X). Although there is good reason to be cautious, we put into question whether cybervetting is an “unreflective activity undertaken by individual hiring agents within organizations that alternately ignore or encourage it” (p. X). Many researchers have warned about the risks of cybervetting early on (e.g., Brown & Vaughn, 2011; Caers & Castelyns, 2011; Davison et al., 2011); job candidates report intentions to withdraw applications (Schneider et al., 2015; Suen, 2018) and sue organizations (Stoughton et al., 2015) if cybervetting is used. Recruiters also report ambiguity about this practice (e.g., Hoek et al., 2016; McDonald et al., 2021; Pike et al., 2018). Rather than stakeholders “uncritically” (Wilcox et al., 2022, p. X) accepting cybervetting, we see a vivid debate. Social media (SM) platforms might be a modern, easily available, less faked, and economic source for first impressions of applicants’ traits, replacing traditional resumés (Davison et al., 2011; Landers & Schmidt, 2016)—if there is evidence for its validity. The debate started when Davison et al. (2011), Roth et al. (2016), and Landers and Schmidt (2016) provided mixed conclusions about cybervetting validity. Following, we shine a light on previous findings regarding cybervetting’s validity, deepen the still unknowns, and call for further action.","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49453352","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Wilcox et al. (2022) astutely addressed the influence of current cybervetting practices with respect to three main stakeholders: job candidates, hiring managers, and organizations. In light of increased awareness of gender-related biases encumbering equitable organizational decision making (e.g., Gaddis, 2015), a particularly important and timely consideration raised by Wilcox et al. was the potential for cybervetting to have a discriminatory effect on job candidates. Yet, despite this (very legitimate) concern that cybervetting may risk exacerbating such inequities, we further consider the contrary possibility that in certain contexts it may harbor some potential to mitigate them. To this end, we consider attributional augmenting as a psychological process via which cybervetting has the potential to attenuate inequitable and discriminatory hiring decisions.
{"title":"Drawing on attributional augmenting to unlock the potential of cybervetting to combat gender discrimination in hiring","authors":"Younsung Cho, M. Mills, Angela R. Grotto","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.40","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.40","url":null,"abstract":"Wilcox et al. (2022) astutely addressed the influence of current cybervetting practices with respect to three main stakeholders: job candidates, hiring managers, and organizations. In light of increased awareness of gender-related biases encumbering equitable organizational decision making (e.g., Gaddis, 2015), a particularly important and timely consideration raised by Wilcox et al. was the potential for cybervetting to have a discriminatory effect on job candidates. Yet, despite this (very legitimate) concern that cybervetting may risk exacerbating such inequities, we further consider the contrary possibility that in certain contexts it may harbor some potential to mitigate them. To this end, we consider attributional augmenting as a psychological process via which cybervetting has the potential to attenuate inequitable and discriminatory hiring decisions.","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47948121","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：