Статья посвящена вопросам влияния власти на поведение человека. Авторы рассматривают данные различных источников, в которых увеличение власти связывается с напористостью, а ее уменьшение - с подавленностью. Конкретно, власть ассоциируется с: а) позитивным аффектом; б) вниманием к вознаграждению и к свойствам других, удовлетворяющим личные цели; в) автоматической переработкой информации и резкими суждениями; г) расторможенным социальным поведением. Уменьшение власти, напротив, ассоциируется с: а) негативным аффектом; б) вниманием к угрозам и наказаниям, к интересам других и к тем характеристикам я, которые отвечают целям других; в) контролируемой переработкой информации и совещательным типом рассуждений; г) подавленным социальным поведением. Обсуждаются также последствия этих паттернов поведения, связанных с властью, и потенциальные модераторы.

Power, approach, and inhibition. Власть, напористость и подавленность

There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research.

Why most published research findings are false

Response bias continues to be the most frequently cited criticism of personality testing for personnel selection. The authors meta-analyzed the social desirability literature, examining whether social desirability functions as a predictor for a variety of criteria, as a suppressor, or as a mediator. Social desirability scales were found not to predict school success, task performance, counterproductive behaviors, and job performance. Correlations with the Big Five personality dimensions, cognitive ability, and years of education are presented along with empirical evidence that (a) social desirability is not as pervasive a problem as has been anticipated by industrial-organizational psychologists, (b) social desirability is in fact related to real individual differences in emotional stability and conscientiousness, and (c) social desirability does not function as a predictor, as a practically useful suppressor, or as a mediator variable for the criterion of job performance. Removing the effects of social desirability from the Big Five dimensions of personality leaves the criterion-related validity of personality constructs for predicting job performance intact.

Role of social desirability in personality testing for personnel selection: The red herring

Many theories of moral behavior share the assumption that unethical behavior triggers negative affect. In this paper, we challenge this assumption. We demonstrate that unethical behavior can trigger positive affect. Across three studies, we find that individuals who cheat on a problem-solving task experience more positive affect than those who do not, even when controlling for financial incentives, and self-selection. Consistent with the notion of a “cheater’s high,” however, the positive affective consequences of cheating are ephemeral. Our results have important implications for models of ethical decision making and self-regulatory theory.

/pdf/the-cheater-s-high-the-unexpected-affective-benefits-of-1dtjdkb3x0.pdf

The Cheater’s High: The Unexpected Affective Benefits of Unethical Behavior

Personality and leadership: Looking forward, looking back

The purpose of this study was to establish the construct validity of the NEO PI-R personality measure when used for high stakes employee selection purposes. Based on extant research from industrial/organisational psychology, social psychology, and behavioural economics it is argued that deliberate impression management, or faking good, by job candidates in high stakes selection contexts can occur. This can be regarded as a form of moral hypocrisy. Theoretical research showed that moral hypocrisy occurs in ambiguous contexts in the absence of reminders of moral standards. It was hypothesised that the use of a formal warning would eliminate or minimise faking good by participants in a field study of job applicants in a high stakes contexts, thereby allowing construct valid inferences to be made about the participant’s personality traits. To test this hypothesis a formal verbal warning about measures included in the assessment to detect deliberate impression management was given to the participants. They completed the NEO PI-R as part of the battery of tests used in the selection process for middle and senior management positions in a range of organisations. A bespoke impression management measure, based on a widely used measure used to detect deliberate impression management, was included in the battery of tests. A second field study sample was used to validate the findings of the managerial field study. Using confirmatory factor analysis the results showed that faking good was minimised, but not eliminated. Monte Carlo simulations showed that it was still possible that participants, who faked good in spite of the warning, could be selected from a short list of job applicants. The use of the bespoke impression management measure was shown to be of benefit in minimising bias and unfairness arising from the use of the personality measure when selecting a candidate from a short list.

Gerry Fahey

Papers

The construct validity of the NEO PI-R personality inventory in high stakes employee selection