Showing papers in "American Psychologist in 1983"

In defense of external invalidity.

Abstract: Many psychological investigations are accused of "failure to generalize to the real world" because of sample bias or artificiality of setting. It is argued in this article that such "generalizations" often are not intended. Rather than making predic- tions about the real world from the laboratory, we may test predictions that specify what ought to hap- pen in the lab. We may regard even "artificial" find- ings as interesting because they show what can occur, even if it rarely does. Or, where we do make gener- alizations, they may have added force because of artificiality of sample or setting. A misplaced preoc- cupation with external validity can lead us to dismiss good research for which generalization to real life is not intended or meaningful.

Studies on anger and aggression: Implications for theories of emotion.

Abstract: Describes a series of surveys on the everyday experience of anger, and a sample of data from these surveys is used to address a number of issues related to the social bases of anger. These issues include the connection between anger and aggression; the targets, instigations, and consequences of typical episodes of anger; the differences between anger and annoyance; and possible sex differences in the experience and/or expression of anger. However, the primary focus of the present paper is not on anger and aggression, but anger is used as a paradigm case to explore a number of issues in the study of emotion, including the advantages and limitations of laboratory research, the use of self-reports, the proper unit of analysis for the study of emotion, the relationship between human and animal emotion, and the authenticity of socially constituted emotional responses. (68 ref)

Gender and Social Influence: A Social Psychological Analysis.

Abstract: Men and women are believed to differ in how influential and easily influenced they are: Men are thought to be more influential, and women more easily influenced. In natural settings, men and women tend to differ in these ways, but these differ- ences stem largely from formal status inequalities by which men are more likely than women to have high-status roles. Status is important because of the legitimate authority vested in high-status roles: Within appropriate limits, people of higher status are believed to have the right to make demands of those of lower status, and people of lower status are ex- pected to comply with these demands. Yet, small, stereotypic sex differences in leadership and social influence generally have been found in laboratory experiments and other small-group settings where men and women have equal formal status. These small sex differences may occur because experience with hierarchical social structures in which men have higher status creates expectancies about male and female behavior, and these expectancies affect social interaction in ways that foster behavior that confirms the expectancies. Sex differences that occur in the laboratory as well as natural settings, then, may stem from social structural factors—namely, from the existing distributions of women and men into social roles.

Comprehending verbal comprehension.

Abstract: Il est debattu des fondements cognitifs de la comprehension verbale et on met surtout l'accent sur le role du contexte dans la comprehension verbale. Apres un tour d'horizon sur les autres approches theoriques de la comprehension verbale, sont exposees les conceptions qui inspirent l'auteur ainsi qu'un certain nombre de donnees empiriques. Sont enfin ebauchees quelques-unes des implications de la nouvelle theorie pour la comprehension de l'intelligence en general

Eyewitness identification: What can a psychologist tell a jury?

Abstract: Psychologists have long been concerned about the use of eyewitness testimony in the courtroom. Recently, it has been suggested that experimental psychologists should testify as expert witnesses in cases involving eyewitnesses to inform the jury about problems with eyewitness testimony. In this article we examine the arguments offered in favor of the use of expert testimony about eyewitnesses. We suggest that contrary to strong claims made recently by several psychologists and lawyers, it is by no means clear that expert psychological testimony about eyewitnesses would improve jurors' ability to evaluate eyewitness testimony. In fact, it is even possible that this sort of expert testimony would have detrimental effects. We suggest that experimental psychologists should carefully consider the issues raised in this article when deciding whether to offer

Quantifying the effects of psychological interventions on employee job performance and work-force productivity.

Abstract: Quantification of the economic impact of psychological programs in organizations requires determination of (a) the size and variability of the resulting increase in job performance, and (b) the economic value of the increase in job performance. The new methods ofmeta-analysis allow attainment of the first of these, and in relation to the second, utility analysis methods enable us to translate job performance increases into estimates of the economic value of the program. In the area of personnel selection, many meta-analytic studies have already been conducted, resulting in precise and genemlizable estimates of the validity of cognitive ability tests and other selection procedures. Utility analyses show that the job performance increases resulting from use of valid selection methods have substantial economic value. Valid selection produces major increases in work-force productivity. State-of-the-art meta-analyses have not yet been carried out for nonselection interventions such as training or motivational programs. Utility analysis of the results of existing reviews suggest, however, that the economic value of many such programs will prove to be large. The combined effects of selection and nonselection interventions can be expected to produce increases in workforce productivity that are large indeed. Applied psychologists have conducted research on a variety of organizational interventions aimed at increasing employee job performance and productivity (Katzell & Guzzo, 1983). The usefulness of this research for business and government has often been bounded by two constraints: (a) the extent to which findings can be made definitive, and (b) the extent to which the impact of findings can be stated in administratively and economically meaningful terms. To render findings definitive, one must reconcile the apparently conflicting results of different studies. To assess the practical impact of findings, one must translate such arcane psychological jargon as "p < .01" into economically meaningful statements such as "a 10% increase in output" or "a reduction of $100 million in labor costs." Recent advances have been made in both areas under the rubrics meta-analysis and utility analysis. This article summarizes, in broad outline, the application of these techniques to the areas of personnel selection and organizational interventions. Meta-analysis is a collection of techniques for quantitatively cumulating results across studies (Glass, McGaw, & Smith, 1981; Hunter, Schmidt, & Jackson, 1982). Meta-analysis has shown that in many areas, there is no real conflict between the results of different studies; the apparent differences are due to sampling error and other artifacts. A stateof-the-art meta-analysis allows the reviewer to correct for the effects of several artifacts that distort findings in individual studies: sampling error, error of measurement, and restriction in range. A review of meta-analysis methods for correlation coefficients and for effect sizes can be found in Hunter et al. (1982). Utility analysis is the assessment of the economic or social impact of organizational programs (Katzell and Guzzo, 1983). A key problem in psychological research is that impact is usually measured on psychological rather than economic scales. For example, job performance is usually measured by supervisor ratings. Thus a special analysis is needed to translate findings into economically meaningful terms, such as dollars of labor savings. In personnel selection, formulas for assessing utility have been available for over 30 years (Brogden, 1949; Cronbach & Gleser, 1965) but have not generally been applied because one parameter in these formulas (the standard deviation of job performance in dollar terms) has been difficult to estimate, Base' line formulas for estimating this parameter now exist (Hunter & Schmidt, 1982; Schmidt, Hunter, McKenzie, & Muldrow, 1979; Schmidt & Hunter, Note 1). Furthermore, the methods of utility analysis have now been extended to the assessment of nonselection organizational interventions such as trainApril 1983 • American Psychologist Copyright 1983 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 473 ing or performance incentive programs (Schmidt, Hunter, & Pearlman, 1982).

Mystery in Milwaukee. Early intervention, IQ, and psychology textbooks.

Abstract: Le projet a debute en 1960. Il s'agissait d'un programme d'intervention pour des enfants presentant de graves risques d'arrieration mentale