Bernhard Streicher

Bio: Bernhard Streicher is an academic researcher from Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich. The author has contributed to research in topics: Risk perception & Risk assessment. The author has an hindex of 11, co-authored 41 publications receiving 622 citations. Previous affiliations of Bernhard Streicher include University of Salzburg & University of Health Sciences Antigua.

Authentic Leadership: An Empirical Test of Its Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Mechanisms

Abstract: The recent economic crisis as well as other disasters such as the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico or the nuclear disaster in Japan has fanned calls for leaders who do not deny responsibility, hide information, and deceive others, but rather lead with authenticity and integrity. In this article, we empirically investigate the concept of authentic leadership. Specifically, we examine the antecedents and individual as well as group-level outcomes of authentic leadership in business (Study 1; n = 306) as well as research organizations (Study 2; n = 105). Findings reveal leader self-knowledge and self-consistency as antecedents of authentic leadership and followers’ satisfaction with supervisor, organizational commitment, and extra-effort as well as perceived team effectiveness as outcomes. The relations between authentic leadership and followers’ work-related attitudes as well as perceived team effectiveness are mediated by perceived predictability of the leader, a particular facet of trust. We discuss the implications of our findings for theory and practice and provide suggestions for advancing theory and research on authentic leadership in the future.

Gerechtigkeitseinschätzungen in Organisationen Die Validität einer deutschsprachigen Fassung des Fragebogens von Colquitt (2001)

Abstract: Zusammenfassung. Das Konstrukt der organisationalen Gerechtigkeit wurde bislang in einer Vielzahl von Studien untersucht, wobei allerdings haufig mit unterschiedlichen Instrumenten unterschiedliche Faktoren erhoben wurden. Um die Ergebnisse zwischen Studien besser vergleichbar zu machen, entwickelte Colquitt (2001) ein vier-faktorielles Messinstrument zur Erhebung der Wahrnehmung organisationaler Gerechtigkeit. In der vorliegenden Studie sollte die Validitat einer deutschsprachigen Version dieses Verfahrens uberpruft werden. Der Fragebogen wurde in einer Stichprobe von 512 Berufstatigen eingesetzt. Die Ergebnisse der konfirmatorischen Faktorenanalysen bestatigten die angenommene vier-faktorielle Struktur. Die Zusammenhange der vier Faktoren mit proximalen und distalen Kriterien belegten die Validitat dieser Version. Vorschlage fur die weitere Validierung dieses Fragebogens werden diskutiert.

How far does it feel? Construal level and decisions under risk

Abstract: Research has shown that framing decisions as gains or losses distorts human judgment. Human judgment is also assumed to be influenced by the actual level of construal. Whether decisions are construed in a more detailed manner (low level construal) or in a more abstract manner (high level construal) can depend on perceived psychological distance. In the present studies, we examined the influence of framing and psychological distance on risk taking. In three studies with students (n = 65), physicians (n = 60), and hotel managers (n = 39), we found evidence that construal level influences risk seeking in gain situations, but not in loss situations. Furthermore, the framing effect could be replicated in psychologically close situations, and was eliminated (Studies 1 and 2) or reversed (Study 3) in psychologically distant situations. Our findings illuminate the interplay of framing and construal level, and points out their applicability in organizational decision making.

Test of the Construct and Criteria Validity of a German Measure of Organizational Justice

Abstract: Organizational justice is a well-known and increasingly often measured construct in work-related psychological research, for which, however, different kinds of measures are used. Colquitt (2001) developed a four-dimensional measure of organizational justice to allow for the comparison of different studies. Two studies provide evidence for the construct (Study 1) and criteria validity (Study 2) of the German version of the Colquitt measure with regard to perceived supervisor behavior as well as employees’ attitudes and intentions. In Study 1, the measure demonstrated construct validity using a German sample of employees (N = 227) from different companies: Each dimension correlated differently with work-related dimension of supervisor behavior. To demonstrate criteria validity in Study 2 (N = 315 employees), the justice measure predicted different, theoretically linked work-related employee behaviors or attitudes (i.e., intentions to leave, job satisfaction, job stress, individual organizational citizenship...

The effect of construal level on risk‐taking

Abstract: In a series of studies, we examined the influence of people's mind-set (construal level (CL): abstract versus concrete) on their risk-taking behavior. We measured differences in CL (study 1, CL as trait) and manipulated CL (studies 1–5, CL as state) with different priming methods, which were unrelated to the dependent variable of risk-taking behavior (studies 1, 3, 4, and 5: Balloon Analog Risk Task; study 2: Angling Risk Task). In all studies, abstract CL resulted in greater risk-taking compared with concrete CL, which led to lower risk-taking. Risky and safe game strategies mediated the CL effect on risk-taking. A concrete mind-set increased the safe game strategy, whereas an abstract mind-set increased the risky game strategy. Furthermore, different potential mediators were explored (i.e., focus on payoffs and probabilities, prevention versus promotion focus, attention to pros versus cons, and mood). A concrete mind-set increased prevention strategies and a negative mood when compared with an abstract mind-set. In turn, an abstract mind-set increased attention to pros (of an action). Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Thinking fast and slow.

Abstract: In 1974 an article appeared in Science magazine with the dry-sounding title “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases” by a pair of psychologists who were not well known outside their discipline of decision theory. In it Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman introduced the world to Prospect Theory, which mapped out how humans actually behave when faced with decisions about gains and losses, in contrast to how economists assumed that people behave. Prospect Theory turned Economics on its head by demonstrating through a series of ingenious experiments that people are much more concerned with losses than they are with gains, and that framing a choice from one perspective or the other will result in decisions that are exactly the opposite of each other, even if the outcomes are monetarily the same. Prospect Theory led cognitive psychology in a new direction that began to uncover other human biases in thinking that are probably not learned but are part of our brain’s wiring.

The Social Psychology of Groups

Abstract: The Social Psychology of Groups. J. W Thibaut & H. H. Kelley. New York: alley, 1959. The team of Thibaut and Kelley goes back to 1946 when, after serving in different units of the armed services psychology program, the authors joined the Research Center for Group Dynamics, first at M.LT and then at the University of Michigan. Their continued association eventuated in appointments as fellows at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, 19561957. It is during these years that their collaboration resulted in the publication of The Social Psychology of Groups. The book was designed to "bring order and coherence to present-day research in interpersonal relations and group functioning." To accomplish this aim, the authors introduced, defined, and illustrated basic concepts in an effort to explain the simplest of social phenomena, the two-person relationship. These basic principles and concepts were then employed to illuminate larger problems and more complex social relationships and to examine the significance of such concepts as roles, norm, power, group cohesiveness, and status. The lasting legacy of this book is derived from the fact that the concepts and principles discussed therein serve as a foundation for one of the dominant conceptual frameworks in the field of family studies today-the social exchange framework. Specifically, much of our contemporary thinking about the process of interpersonal attraction and about how individuals evaluate their close relationships has been influenced by the theory and concepts introduced in The Social Psychology of Groups. Today, as a result of Thibaut and Kelley, we think of interpersonal attraction as resulting from the unique valence of driving and restraining forces, rewards and costs, subjectively thought to be available from a specific relationship and its competing alternatives. We understand, as well, that relationships are evaluated through complex and subjectively based comparative processes. As a result, when we think about assessing the degree to which individuals are satisfied with their relationships, we take into consideration the fact that individuals differ in terms of the importance they attribute to different aspects of a relationship (e.g., financial security, sexual fulfillment, companionship). We also take into consideration the fact that individuals differ in terms of the levels of rewards and costs that they believe are realistically obtainable and deserved from a relationship. In addition, as a result of Thibaut and Kelley's theoretical focus on the concept of dependence and the interrelationship between attraction and dependence, there has evolved within the field of family studies a deeper appreciation for the complexities and variability found within relationships. Individuals are dependent on their relationships, according to Thibaut and Kelley, when the outcomes derived from the existing relationship exceed those perceived to be available in competing alternatives. Individuals who are highly dependent on their relationships are less likely to act to end their relationships. This dependence and the stability it engenders may or may not be voluntary, depending on the degree to which individuals are attracted to and satisfied with their relationships. When individuals are both attracted to and dependent on their relationships, they can be thought of as voluntarily participating in their relationship. That is, they are likely to commit themselves to the partner and relationship and actively work for its continuance. Thibaut and Kelley termed those relationships characterized by low levels of satisfaction and high levels of dependence "nonvoluntary relationships. …

"Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of emotional state": Erratum

Abstract: The problem of which cues, internal or external, permit a person to label and identify his own emotional state has been with us since the days that James (1890) first tendered his doctrine that \"the bodily changes follow directly the perception of the exciting fact, and that our feeling of the same changes as they occur is the emotion\" (p. 449). Since we are aware of a variety of feeling and emotion states, it should follow from James' proposition that the various emotions will be accompanied by a variety of differentiable bodily states. Following James' pronouncement, a formidable number of studies were undertaken in search of the physiological differentiators of the emotions. The results, in these early days, were almost uniformly negative. All of the emotional states experi-