Journal Of Applied Psychology Research Articles

The survey of factors related to self-efficacy based on Orem’s theory in patients with coronary artery bypass surgery in Tehran in 2014

The survey of factors related to self-efficacy based on Orem’s theory in patients with coronary artery bypass surgery in Tehran in 2014

The Precision of Effect Size Estimation From Published Psychological Research: Surveying Confidence Intervals.

Confidence interval ( CI) widths were calculated for reported Cohen's d standardized effect sizes and examined in two automated surveys of published psychological literature. The first survey reviewed 1,902 articles from Psychological Science. The second survey reviewed a total of 5,169 articles from across the following four APA journals: Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, and Developmental Psychology. The median CI width for d was greater than 1 in both surveys. Hence, CI widths were, as Cohen (1994) speculated, embarrassingly large. Additional exploratory analyses revealed that CI widths varied across psychological research areas and that CI widths were not discernably decreasing over time. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed along with ways of reducing the CI widths and thus improving precision of effect size estimation.

Correction to Mikolon, Kreiner, and Wieseke (2015).

Reports an error in "Seeing You Seeing Me: Stereotypes and the Stigma Magnification Effect" by Sven Mikolon, Glen E. Kreiner and Jan Wieseke (Journal of Applied Psychology, Advanced Online Publication, Dec 14, 2015, np). In the article, Table 2 contained a production-related formatting error. Values from column 11 onward were shifted upwards in the table. All versions of this article have been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2015-56319-001.) Despite an increased interest in the phenomenon of stigma in organizations, we know very little about the interactions between those who are stigmatized and those who stigmatize them. Integrating both the perceptions of the stigmatized worker and the stigmatizing customer into one model, the present study addresses this gap. It examines the role of stereotypes held by customers of stigmatized organizations and metastereotypes held by the stigmatized workers themselves (i.e., their shared beliefs of the stereotypes customers associate with them) in frontline exchanges. To do so, data regarding frontline workers (vendors) of homeless-advocate newspapers from 3 different sources (vendors, customers, trained observers) were gathered. Multilevel path-analytic hypotheses tests reveal (a) how frontline workers' prototypicality for a stigmatized organization renders salient a stigma within frontline interactions and (b) how stereotypes by customers and metastereotypes by frontline workers interact with each other in such contacts. The results support a hypothesized interaction between frontline workers' metastereotypes and customers' stereotypes-what we call the "stigma magnification effect". The study also derives important practical implications by linking stigma to frontline workers' discretionary financial gains. (PsycINFO Database Record

"Demographic faultlines: A meta-analysis of the literature": Retraction of Thatcher and Patel (2011).

Reports the retraction of "Demographic faultlines: A meta-analysis of the literature" by Sherry M. B. Thatcher and Pankaj C. Patel (Journal of Applied Psychology, 2011[Nov], Vol 96[6], 1119-1139). At the request of the editor and in consultation with the American Psychological Association, the article is being retracted. This action is a result of a review by the editor and two additional experts that determined that there are significant errors in Tables 1, 2, and 3 which may affect the overall conclusions of the article. Co-author Pankaj C. Patel led the analysis, and both authors acknowledge that inaccuracies were made. The retraction of this article does not preclude resubmission of a new article that addresses the issues noted in the retraction. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2011-12686-001.) We propose and test a theoretical model focusing on antecedents and consequences of demographic faultlines. We also posit contingencies that affect overall team dynamics in the context of demographic faultlines, such as the study setting and performance measurement. Using meta-analysis structural equation modeling with a final data set consisting of 311 data points (i.e., k [predictor–criterion relationships]), from 39 studies that were obtained from 36 papers with a total sample size of 24,388 individuals in 4,366 teams, we found that sex and racial diversity increased demographic faultline strength more than did diversity on the attributes of functional background, educational background, age, and tenure. Demographic faultline strength was found to increase task and relationship conflict as well as decrease team cohesion. Furthermore, although demographic faultline strength decreased both team satisfaction and team performance, there was a stronger decrease in team performance than in team satisfaction. The strength of these relationships increased when the study was conducted in the lab rather than in the field. We describe the theoretical and practical implications of these findings for advancing the study of faultlines.

Seeing you seeing me: Stereotypes and the stigma magnification effect.

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 101(5) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2016-21000-001). In the article, Table 2 contained a production-related formatting error. Values from column 11 onward were shifted upwards in the table. All versions of this article have been corrected.] Despite an increased interest in the phenomenon of stigma in organizations, we know very little about the interactions between those who are stigmatized and those who stigmatize them. Integrating both the perceptions of the stigmatized worker and the stigmatizing customer into one model, the present study addresses this gap. It examines the role of stereotypes held by customers of stigmatized organizations and metastereotypes held by the stigmatized workers themselves (i.e., their shared beliefs of the stereotypes customers associate with them) in frontline exchanges. To do so, data regarding frontline workers (vendors) of homeless-advocate newspapers from 3 different sources (vendors, customers, trained observers) were gathered. Multilevel path-analytic hypotheses tests reveal (a) how frontline workers' prototypicality for a stigmatized organization renders salient a stigma within frontline interactions and (b) how stereotypes by customers and metastereotypes by frontline workers interact with each other in such contacts. The results support a hypothesized interaction between frontline workers' metastereotypes and customers' stereotypes-what we call the "stigma magnification effect". The study also derives important practical implications by linking stigma to frontline workers' discretionary financial gains. (PsycINFO Database Record

HARKing's Threat to Organizational Research: Evidence From Primary and Meta‐Analytic Sources

We assessed presumed consequences of hypothesizing after results are known (HARKing) by contrasting hypothesized versus nonhypothesized effect sizes among 10 common relations in organizational behavior, human resource management, and industrial and organizational psychology research. In Study 1, we analyzed 247 correlations representing 9 relations with individual performance in 136 articles published in Journal of Applied Psychology and Personnel Psychology and provide evidence that correlations are significantly larger when hypothesized compared to nonhypothesized. In Study 2, we analyzed 281 effect sizes from a meta‐analysis on the job satisfaction–job performance relation and provide evidence that correlations are significantly larger when hypothesized compared to nonhypothesized. In addition, in Study 2, we documented that hypothesized variable pairs are more likely to be mentioned in article titles or abstracts. We also ruled out 13 alternative explanations to the presumed HARKing effect pertaining to methodological (e.g., unreliability, publication year, research setting, research design, measure contextualization, publication source) and substantive (e.g., predictor–performance pair, performance measure, satisfaction measure, occupation, job/task complexity) issues. Our results suggest that HARKing seems to pose a threat to research results, substantive conclusions, and practical applications. We offer recommended solutions to the HARKing threat.

Leader narcissism and follower outcomes: The counterbalancing effect of leader humility.

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 100(4) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2015-29666-001). The last name of the second author was misspelled in the Online First version of the article. All versions of this article have been corrected.] In response to recent calls to theorize and examine how multiple leader characteristics may work together in their effects, the current research examines how leader narcissism and humility interact to predict perceived leader effectiveness and follower (i.e., direct-report) job engagement and performance. Although an examination of leaders who are narcissistic yet humble may seem oxymoronic and even paradoxical, researchers have suggested that seemingly contradictory personal attributes may exist simultaneously and may actually work together to produce positive outcomes. Results from survey data from followers and leaders working for a large health insurance organization showed that the interaction of leader narcissism and leader humility is associated with perceptions of leader effectiveness, follower job engagement, and subjective and objective follower job performance. Together, these results suggest that narcissistic leaders can have positive effects on followers when their narcissism is tempered by humility.

Correlational effect size benchmarks.

Effect size information is essential for the scientific enterprise and plays an increasingly central role in the scientific process. We extracted 147,328 correlations and developed a hierarchical taxonomy of variables reported in Journal of Applied Psychology and Personnel Psychology from 1980 to 2010 to produce empirical effect size benchmarks at the omnibus level, for 20 common research domains, and for an even finer grained level of generality. Results indicate that the usual interpretation and classification of effect sizes as small, medium, and large bear almost no resemblance to findings in the field, because distributions of effect sizes exhibit tertile partitions at values approximately one-half to one-third those intuited by Cohen (1988). Our results offer information that can be used for research planning and design purposes, such as producing better informed non-nil hypotheses and estimating statistical power and planning sample size accordingly. We also offer information useful for understanding the relative importance of the effect sizes found in a particular study in relationship to others and which research domains have advanced more or less, given that larger effect sizes indicate a better understanding of a phenomenon. Also, our study offers information about research domains for which the investigation of moderating effects may be more fruitful and provide information that is likely to facilitate the implementation of Bayesian analysis. Finally, our study offers information that practitioners can use to evaluate the relative effectiveness of various types of interventions.

Are We Correcting Correctly?

The formulae for attenuation correction in meta-analysis treat reliabilities as if they were independent of each other. The current study puts this assumption of independence to the test by empirically examining the correlation among predictor and criterion reliability estimates across studies. Interdependence of reliabilities would result in either overestimation or underestimation of population correlations depending on the direction of the relationship between the reliabilities. We conducted two studies to examine the extent to which predictor and criterion reliabilities correlate across studies. Study 1 is based on 628 pairs of reliability estimates from 518 studies published in the Academy of Management Journal and the Journal of Applied Psychology between 2004 and 2011, while Study 2 is based on 564 pairs of reliability estimates from 347 studies included in a meta-analysis on perceived organizational support (POS) and some of its antecedents and outcomes. The findings in both studies show substantial correlations between predictor and criterion reliability coefficients across studies. Our article discusses important implications from these findings for future research and for the future conduct of meta-analyses.

Small sample mediation testing: misplaced confidence in bootstrapped confidence intervals.

Bootstrapping is an analytical tool commonly used in psychology to test the statistical significance of the indirect effect in mediation models. Bootstrapping proponents have particularly advocated for its use for samples of 20-80 cases. This advocacy has been heeded, especially in the Journal of Applied Psychology, as researchers are increasingly utilizing bootstrapping to test mediation with samples in this range. We discuss reasons to be concerned with this escalation, and in a simulation study focused specifically on this range of sample sizes, we demonstrate not only that bootstrapping has insufficient statistical power to provide a rigorous hypothesis test in most conditions but also that bootstrapping has a tendency to exhibit an inflated Type I error rate. We then extend our simulations to investigate an alternative empirical resampling method as well as a Bayesian approach and demonstrate that they exhibit comparable statistical power to bootstrapping in small samples without the associated inflated Type I error. Implications for researchers testing mediation hypotheses in small samples are presented. For researchers wishing to use these methods in their own research, we have provided R syntax in the online supplemental materials.

A meta-analysis of personality and workplace safety: addressing unanswered questions.

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 100(2) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2015-08139-001). Table 3 contained formatting errors. Minus signs used to indicate negative statistical estimates within the table were inadvertently changed to m-dashes. All versions of this article have been corrected.] The purpose of this meta-analysis was to address unanswered questions regarding the associations between personality and workplace safety by (a) clarifying the magnitude and meaning of these associations with both broad and facet-level personality traits, (b) delineating how personality is associated with workplace safety, and (c) testing the relative importance of personality in comparison to perceptions of the social context of safety (i.e., safety climate) in predicting safety-related behavior. Our results revealed that whereas agreeableness and conscientiousness were negatively associated with unsafe behaviors, extraversion and neuroticism were positively associated with them. Of these traits, agreeableness accounted for the largest proportion of explained variance in safety-related behavior and openness to experience was unrelated. At the facet level, sensation seeking, altruism, anger, and impulsiveness were all meaningfully associated with safety-related behavior, though sensation seeking was the only facet that demonstrated a stronger relationship than its parent trait (i.e., extraversion). In addition, meta-analytic path modeling supported the theoretical expectation that personality's associations with accidents are mediated by safety-related behavior. Finally, although safety climate perceptions accounted for the majority of explained variance in safety-related behavior, personality traits (i.e., agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism) still accounted for a unique and substantive proportion of the explained variance. Taken together, these results substantiate the value of considering personality traits as key correlates of workplace safety.

Toward a meaningful metric of implicit prejudice.

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 100(5) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2015-40760-001). there are errors in some of the values listed in Table 6 that do not alter any of the conclusions or substantive statements in the original article. The corrected portion of Table 6 is in the correction. The positive intercepts in this table represent the estimated IAT score when the criterion has a value of zero (suggesting attitudinal neutrality), except in the equation examining voter preference in Greenwald et al. (2009), where the intercept estimated the IAT score of Obama voters.] The modal distribution of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) is commonly interpreted as showing high levels of implicit prejudice among Americans. These interpretations have fueled calls for changes in organizational and legal practices, but such applications are problematic because the IAT is scored on an arbitrary psychological metric. The present research was designed to make the IAT metric less arbitrary by determining the scores on IAT measures that are associated with observable racial or ethnic bias. By reexamining data from published studies, we found evidence that the IAT metric is "right biased," such that individuals who are behaviorally neutral tend to have positive IAT scores. Current scoring conventions fail to take into account these dynamics and can lead to faulty inferences about the prevalence of implicit prejudice.

Response latencies are alive and well for identifying fakers on a self-report personality inventory: A reconsideration of van Hooft and Born (2012).

Van Hooft and Born (Journal of Applied Psychology 97:301-316, 2012) presented data challenging both the correctness of a congruence model of faking on personality test items and the relative merit (i.e., effect size) of response latencies for identifying fakers. We suggest that their analysis of response times was suboptimal, and that it followed neither from a congruence model of faking nor from published protocols on appropriately filtering the noise in personality test item answering times. Using new data and following recommended analytic procedures, we confirmed the relative utility of response times for identifying personality test fakers, and our obtained results, again, reinforce a congruence model of faking.

The Move to Business Schools: How Is Industrial–Organizational Psychology Holding Up in Europe?

Aguinis, Bradley, and Brodersen (2014) empirically documented the move of industrial–organizational (I–O) psychologists to business schools, thereby mainly focusing on the situation in the United States. However, in the last decades, I–O psychology has seen a trend toward internationalization. For instance, since the early 1990s, there has been a steady increase in the number of authors from outside of the U.S. publishing in Journal of Applied Psychology (JAP) and Personnel Psychology (PPsych; Cascio & Aguinis, 2008). Similarly, in international rankings the number of European business schools has increased (Collet & Vives, 2013). This begs the question as to whether a similar move from I–O psychologists to business schools has occurred in Europe as in the United States. In this commentary, we discuss the degree to which the observations and predictions of Aguinis et al. apply to Europe. We provide empirical evidence that a change of similar magnitude has so far not taken place in Europe by presenting data on the affiliations of European authors in publications and editorial boards. To explain this limited generalizability to the European context, we highlight three boundary conditions (European business university system, varying research environments, and

Brain Drain, Invader, Virus, Traveler: On the Evolution of Industrial–Organizational Psychology

Aguinis, Bradley, and Brodersen (2014) write of the apparent migration of industrial–organizational (I–O) psychologists to business schools and raise questions about the value and consequences of such migration. As a scholar in a school of business I found this article to be provocative, stimulating, and even surprising (my own eye opener). For example, it caused me to consider the important, and often underevaluated, distinctions between disciplines and departmental loci, fundamental differences (and similarities) between psychology and business, and the growth, decline, and general evolution of disciplines. Although I have spent more than 40 years as a faculty member in the Wisconsin School of Business, I see myself as similar in many ways to scholars in I–O psychology departments. I have published in psychology journals such as Psychological Bulletin, Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, and Industrial and Organizational Psychology; have served for many years on the editorial review board of the Journal of Applied Psychology; and have presented at Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) and Association for Psychological Science (APS) meetings. I have regularly taught courses and seminars on I–O psychology and related organizational behavior (OB) topics for decades.

From the Guest Editors: Change the World: Teach Evidence-Based Practice!

From the Guest Editors: Change the World: Teach Evidence-Based Practice!

“Exploring the disruptive effects of psychopathy and aggression on group processes and group effectiveness”: Correction to Baysinger et al. (2013).

Reports an error in Exploring the Disruptive Effects of Psychopathy and Aggression on Group Processes and Group Effectiveness by Michael A. Baysinger, Kelly T. Scherer and James M. LeBreton (Journal of Applied Psychology, Advanced Online Publication, Sep 9, 2013, np). In the article, the author order was originally incorrect. All versions of this article have been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2013-31564-001.) The present research examines the influence of implicit and explicit personality characteristics on group process and effectiveness. Individuals from 112 groups participated in 2 problem-solving tasks and completed measures of group process and effectiveness. Results indicated that groups characterized by higher levels of psychopathy and implicit aggression tended to have more dysfunctional interactions and negative perceptions of the group. In addition, task participation and negative socioemotional behaviors fully mediated the relationship between group personality traits and group commitment and cohesion, and negative socioemotional behaviors fully mediated the relationship between group personality and performance on both tasks. Implications of antisocial traits for group interactions and performance, as well as for future theory and research, are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)

Irwin L. Goldstein (1937–2013).

Irwin L. Goldstein-known as Irv by everyone-was born in New York City on October 4, 1937 and died on March 18, 2013. Irv loved ideas, especially good theoretical ideas that had practical applications. He was both a scholar and a practitioner of industrial psychology. At various times, he was associate editor of both the Journal of Applied Psychology and Human Factors, and his very influential book Training in Organizations (1974) went through four editions. The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) benefited enormously from his efforts on its behalf. If you chatted with Irv about any of his administrative positions, but especially about this last one, you would hear how much he felt, once again, that he was learning and how excited he was about what was actually possible in higher education. Irv retired from this position in 2012. In his many academic administrative roles, Irv was a mentor to all-graduate students, faculty, department chairs, and deans as well. Irv had had excellent role models to work from, and he cared for excellence and hard work-always with a twinkle in his eyes.

"Reducing job insecurity and increasing performance ratings: Does impression management matter?": Correction to Huang et al. (2013).

Reports an error in Reducing job insecurity and increasing performance ratings: Does impression management matter by Guo-hua Huang, Helen Hailin Zhao, Xiong-ying Niu, Susan J. Ashford and Cynthia Lee (Journal of Applied Psychology, 2013[Sep], Vol 98[5], 852-862). In the original article, the grant information in the author note was incorrect. The corrected note is presented in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2013-19337-001.) Prior research on job insecurity has demonstrated its detrimental effects on both employees and the organization, yet no research has detailed how people actively deal with it. Drawing from proactivity research, this article argues that job insecurity prompts a proactive use of impression management tactics in the workplace. The effectiveness of these tactics depends on the level of supervisory liking for the employee and the attributions supervisors make regarding the employee�s motives for the impression management behaviors (i.e., for the good of the organization or for self-interest). A 3-wave survey study of 271 Chinese employees and their supervisors showed that employees experiencing job insecurity in Time 1 reported using a variety of tactics to impress their supervisors at Time 2 and that these tactics curbed the affect associated with job insecurity and enhanced supervisor rated performance, through supervisor�s liking and attributed motives. The relationship between impression management and increased supervisor-rated performance was moderated by supervisor attributions; the relationship between impression management and reduced affective job insecurity depended on supervisor liking. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)

Practice and Research in Career Counseling and Development—2012

This annual review of the 2012 career development/vocational psychology literature includes 191 empirical (69%) and conceptual (31%) articles from career, counseling, development, and international journals. The review is divided into 4 major areas: professional issues, work and well‐being, life‐span perspectives, and career theory and concepts. Subsumed within these clusters are foci on the status of career/vocational guidance around the globe, the career development experiences of immigrants, and the effects of economic stress. The authors offer three summarizing impressions. First, the 2012 collection is definitively global; this is a credit to the individual and institutional dimensions of the counseling profession. Second, the research articles represent a wide array of methodological approaches, and researchers have made wise research design choices for their areas of inquiry. Third, there is a true professional responsiveness to the needs of the world. It is suggested that the 2012 literature reflects Parsons's early vision of social justice and multiculturalism.