University of North Carolina at Charlotte

About: University of North Carolina at Charlotte is a education organization based out in Charlotte, North Carolina, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 8772 authors who have published 22239 publications receiving 562529 citations. The organization is also known as: UNC Charlotte & UNCC.

The Work Addiction Risk Test: development of a tentative measure of workaholism.

Abstract: The development and analyses of the psychometric characteristics of a tentative self-report measure of work addiction are reported. A total of 363 college students completed a battery of tests including the Work Addiction Risk Test. Internal consistency of the scores was .88. Also, these scores were compared with those on the Type A Self-rating Scale and the Jenkins Activity Survey, which give self-reports of Type A behavior and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. That scores on the work addiction risk test were reliable and showed concurrent validity supported psychometric utility for research and clinical practice.

Genetic influence on daily wheel running activity level

Abstract: This project was designed to determine the genetic (between-strain) and environmental (within-strain) variance in daily running wheel activity level in inbred mice. Five male and five female mice, ...

A 3‐factor model for the FACIT‐Sp

Abstract: Objective: The 12-item Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy—Spiritual Well-being Scale (FACIT-Sp) is a popular measure of the religious/spiritual (R/S) components of quality of life (QoL) in patients with cancer. The original factor analyses of the FACIT-Sp supported two factors: Meaning/Peace and Faith. Because Meaning suggests a cognitive aspect of R/S and Peace an affective component, we hypothesized a 3-factor solution: Meaning, Peace, and Faith. Methods: Participants were 240 long-term female survivors of cancer who completed the FACIT-Sp, the SF-12, and the BSI 18. We used confirmatory factor analysis to compare the 2- and 3-factor models of the FACIT-Sp and subsequently assessed associations between the resulting solutions and QoL domains. Results: Survivors averaged 44 years of age and 10 years post-diagnosis. A 3-factor solution of the FACIT-Sp significantly improved the fit of the model to the data over the original 2-factor structure (Δχ2=72.36, df=2, p<0.001). Further adjustments to the 3-factor model resulted in a final solution with even better goodness-of-fit indices (χ2=59.11, df=1, p=0.13, CFI=1.00, SMRM=0.05). The original Meaning/Peace factor controlling for Faith was associated with mental (r=0.63, p<0.000) and physical (r=0.22, p<0.01) health on the SF-12, and the original Faith factor controlling for Meaning/Peace was negatively associated with mental health (r=−0.15, p<0.05). The 3-factor model was more informative. Specifically, using partial correlations, the Peace factor was only related to mental health (r=0.53, p<0.001); Meaning was related to both physical (r=0.18, p<0.01) and mental (r=0.17, p<0.01) health; and Faith was negatively associated with mental health (r=−0.17, p<0.05). Conclusion: The results of this study support a 3-factor solution of the FACIT-Sp. The new solution not only represents a psychometric improvement over the original, but also enables a more detailed examination of the contribution of different dimensions of R/S to QoL. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Predicting workplace deviance from the interaction between organizational justice and personality.

Abstract: Workplace deviance refers to voluntary behaviors by employees that violate significant company norms, policies, or rules and threaten the well-being of the organization and/or its members (Robinson and Bennett, 1995) Examples of workplace deviance include both behaviors directed at organizations (eg, theft, sabotage, coming to work late, putting little effort into work) and individuals in the workplace, such as supervisors or coworkers (eg, making fun of others, playing mean pranks, acting rudely, arguing) Until recently, workplace deviance has been a neglected topic in organizational research (eg, Greenberg and Scott, 1996) Instead, researchers emphasize behaviors such as organizational citizenship behavior or contextual performance that result in positive outcomes for organizations However, attention is turning to the study of behaviors at the other end of the spectrum be cause of their increasing prevalence and detrimental effects on organizations Employee theft and fraud is the fastest growing type of crime in the US (Coffin, 2003) It has been estimated that three quarters of employees steal at least once from their employer (Coffin, 2003) and that 95% of all organizations experience employee theft (Case, 2000) The prevalence of deviant employee behaviors is especially disturbing when the costs to both affected organizations and individuals are considered For instance, the financial costs associated with theft by employees in the US have been estimated at $50 billion annually (Coffin, 2003) Further, employees who are targets of workplace deviance are more likely to quit, have stress-related problems, decreased productivity, low morale, lost work time (O'Leary-Kelly et al, 1996), damaged self-esteem, increased fear and insecurity at work, and psychological and physical pain (Griffin el al, 1998) Research regarding workplace deviance often investigates personal (eg, Douglas and Martinko, 2001; Salgado, 2002) or situational (eg, Greenberg, 1990; Skarlicki and Fob get, 1997) predictors while neglecting the interaction between the two The purpose of this study is to contribute to the workplace deviance literature by adopting an interactional approach to empirically examine how both person- and situation-based variables interact to explain workplace deviance Specifically, organizational justice and employee personality are hypothesized to interact in the prediction of workplace deviance after controlling for demographics known to influence participation in deviant work behaviors The following sections discuss the approaches for studying workplace deviance, the negative relationship between organizational justice and workplace deviance, and two personality traits that may moderate this relationship (socialization and impulsivity) INTERACTIONAL APPROACH TO STUDYING WORKPLACE DEVIANCE Two perspectives have emerged to predict workplace deviance The first, situation-based, advocates that certain characteristics of the work environment predispose organizations to employee deviance That is, workplace deviance is solely a product of the organization in which employees work Empirical research demonstrates that certain organizational factors make companies more vulnerable to deviant behaviors by employees such as job stressors (eg, Fox et al, 2001), organizational frustration (eg, Spector, 1975), lack of control over the work environment (eg, Bennett, 1998), weak sanctions for rule violations (eg, Hollinger and Clark, 1983), and organizational changes such as downsizing (eg, Baron and Neuman, 1996) Thus, according to this perspective, employees will commit deviant acts at work depending on the work environment they are in regardless of their individual characteristics The second perspective uses person-based explanations to expound why employees vary in their propensity to be deviant According to this perspective, personality dictates how individuals will behave irrespective of the environment or situation they are in …