Search

Although employee selection is typically oriented toward the assessment of knowledge, skills, and abilities to identify employees who will complement such an environment, it is perhaps equally important to distinguish employees with the potential to disrupt it. Workers high in narcissistic grandiosity tend to abuse their power and control for personal gain, engage in abusive behaviors toward others, and disobey organizational policies. Across four studies, we sought to develop the Narcissism Interview Scale for Employment (NISE) to assess narcissistic grandiosity. Study 1 created interview questions that elicited responses with narcissistic grandiosity content, structured as both behavioral/situational and work-specific. Study 2 identified the best performing items and developed rating materials. Study 3 demonstrated the NISE is associated with traditional survey assessments of narcissistic grandiosity and predicted interpersonal aggression. Study 4 demonstrated that applicants are likely to perceive the NISE at least as favorably as other popular interview questions. Overall, the results showed that the NISE may be incorporated into the interview process to assess applicant narcissistic grandiosity tendencies, but additional research is needed to further establish the construct validity of the instrument, clarify applicant reactions to its use, and assess its predictive utility across a variety of work contexts.

Two complementary studies were conducted to compare emotional support and instrumental support in the workplace. Study 1 included meta-analyses with 142 independent samples containing 68,354 participants and tested the moderation effects of source of support (supervisor vs. coworker) and support scale type (received vs. availability). Study 2 incorporated a two-wave survey design and objective ratings of participant job demands. Overall, emotional support and instrumental support were strongly correlated and demonstrated a similar pattern of effects with work criteria. However, the emotional support-instrumental support relationship is stronger within occupations higher in emotional labor demands. Moderation effects of support on stressor-criteria relationships were also reviewed among the primary studies in the meta-analysis. For both emotional support and instrumental support, buffering effects and reverse buffering effects were commonly found, which indicates that contextual factors need to be considered to determine when support mitigates or exacerbates the effect of stressors on work criteria. Moderation effects of source of support (supervisor vs. coworker) and support scale type (received vs. availability) were also tested. In general, support was more strongly correlated with criteria when the source of support was the supervisor and the scale included items about the availability of support. The findings from the two studies provide researchers and practitioners a guide for when emotional support and instrumental support converge or diverge. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

As a departure from traditional situational perspectives, researchers have given increased attention to the dispositional basis of attitudes. Recently, Hepler and Albarracín (2013) introduced a construct that they called "dispositional attitude" and provided validity evidence for a new scale--the Dispositional Attitude Measure (DAM). Although the DAM was introduced as a "new" approach for assessing the dispositional component of attitudes, there is considerable conceptual similarity between it and the Neutral Objects Satisfaction Questionnaire (NOSQ; Judge & Bretz, 1993; Weitz, 1952). In a series of 4 studies, we attempt to replicate the predictive validity of the DAM and empirically examined the distinctiveness of the DAM from the NOSQ. Our findings suggest that the DAM does not consistently predict attitudes (e.g., attitudes toward fictional consumer products, attitudes toward common objects, job satisfaction) after the NOSQ is controlled. As a whole, our results suggest that the DAM and NOSQ assess the same underlying construct and both are valid measures of the dispositional basis of attitudes., ((c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).)

Very little is known about the process in which people reappraise a stressful environment or the factors that may influence this process. In the current study, we address the several limitations to previous research regarding stress reappraisals and explore the role of affect on this process. A total of 320 participants (mean age = 20 years, 60% male) completed an increasingly demanding team-based coordination task. Mood and stress appraisals were assessed at three time points using self-report surveys during four different waves of data collection. The longitudinal design enabled us to assess primary and secondary reappraisals (change in appraisals during the experiment), task-irrelevant affect (affect assessed prior to experiment participation), and task-relevant affect (change in affect experienced during the experiment). Guided by the Transactional Theory of Stress, we argue that the relationship between primary reappraisal and secondary reappraisal is an accurate representation of a dynamic stress appraisal process. We found that participants were more likely to engage in the stress appraisal process when they experienced less task-irrelevant positive affect and greater task-relevant positive affect. Both task-irrelevant and task-relevant negative affect were not found to influence the stress appraisal process.

Objective: The authors evaluated the validity of trust in automation and information technology (IT) suspicion by examining their factor structure and relationship with decision confidence., Background: Research on trust has burgeoned, yet the dimensionality of trust remains elusive. Researchers suggest that trust is a unidimensional construct, whereas others believe it is multidimensional. Additionally, novel constructs,such as IT suspicion, have yet to be distinguished from trust in automation. Research is needed to examine the overlap between these constructs and to determine the dimensionality of trust in automation., Method: Participants (N = 72) engaged in a computer-based convoy scenario involving an automated decision aid. The aid fused real-time sensor data and provided route recommendations to participants who selected a route based on (a) a map with historical enemy information, (b) sensor inputs, and (c) automation suggestions. Measures for trust in automation and IT suspicion were administered after individuals interacted with the automation., Results: Results indicated three orthogonal factors: trust, distrust, and IT suspicion. Each variable was explored as a predictor of decision confidence. Distrust and trust evidenced unique influences on decision confidence, albeit at different times. Higher distrust related to less confidence, whereas trust related to greater confidence., Conclusion: The current study found that trust in automation was best characterized by two orthogonal dimensions (trust and distrust). Both trust and distrust were found to be independent from IT suspicion,and both distrust and trust uniquely predicted decision confidence., Application: Researchers may consider using separate measures for trust and distrust in future studies.

The current meta-analysis examined the hypothesized consequences of work and general locus of control. As expected, work locus of control generally yielded stronger relationships with work-related criteria (e.g., job satisfaction, affective commitment, and burnout) than general locus of control. We also found some evidence that general locus of control yielded relatively stronger relationships with general criteria (e.g., life satisfaction, affective commitment, and burnout). Regression analysis found several unique effects for both work and general locus of control.

The current study, which is framed within the context of the Transactional Theory of Stress and Coping, examined counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) as a response to ineffective coping with work stressors. More specifically, we examined whether the relationship between work stressors and CWBs was moderated by employee personality. Analyses using data collected from 726 adults employed in a diverse set of occupations found that work stressors were more strongly related to CWBs among workers who were low in conscientiousness, or high in negative affectivity (NA) than among workers who were high in conscientiousness, or low in NA. We found less consistent support, however, for the moderating effects of agreeableness.