Getting interested in interests for employee selection: Key concerns and areas for future research

The paper by Wille and De Fruyt suggests that vocational interests should be used throughout the human resources cycle and provides a useful model that can facilitate the application of interests throughout this process. This commentary builds on their review to discuss the unique benefits and challenges of implementing vocational interests in the employee selection process. Using research from the employee selection literature, we also discuss potential solutions for many of the issues raised by Wille and De Fruyt. Therefore, our commentary is meant to supplement the focal article and answer specific questions about why and how vocational interests can be used in this high-stakes setting.     

Intentional response distortion during the COVID-19 pandemic

COVID-19 has abruptly and unexpectedly transformed nearly every aspect of work, including but not limited to increased unemployment rates and uncertainty regarding future job prospects. Response distortion has always been a concern given that many organizations rely on information that is self-reported by applicants regarding their potential employability (e.g., responses to self-reported personality instruments, resumes, interview responses). Drawing from the Valence-Instrumentality-Expectancy (VIE) theory of motivation, we propose that the uncertainty surrounding jobs may lead to amplified distorted responses on these measures in areas where COVID-19 was most salient. In a sample of 213 working adults [~50% female, age M = 38.48], the present study shows that increases in response distortion on a measure of conscientiousness were more pronounced as a function of (a) local COVID positivity rates and (b) job type, such that frontline workers distorted their responses the most. Findings are discussed in the context of VIE theory, personality measurement, and challenges with maintaining effective selection procedures.     

Llamas use social information from conspecifics and humans to solve a spatial detour task

Animal Cognition - Learning by observing others (i.e. social learning) is an important mechanism to reduce the costs of individual learning. Social learning can occur between conspecifics but also...     

Lies and bullshit: The negative effects of misinformation grow stronger over time

In a world where exposure to untrustworthy communicators is common, trust has become more important than ever for effective marketing. Nevertheless, we know very little about the long-term consequences of exposure to untrustworthy sources, such bullshitters. This research examines how untrustworthy sources—liars and bullshitters—influence consumer attitudes toward a product. Frankfurt's (1986) insidious bullshit hypothesis (i.e., bullshitting is evaluated less negatively than lying but bullshit can be more harmful than are lies) is examined within a traditional sleeper effect—a persuasive influence that increases, rather than decays over time. We obtained a sleeper effect after participants learned that the source of the message was either a liar or a bullshitter. However, compared to the liar source condition, the same message from a bullshitter resulted in more extreme immediate and delayed attitudes that were in line with an otherwise discounted persuasive message (i.e., an advertisement). Interestingly, attitudes returned to control condition levels when a bullshitter was the source of the message, suggesting that knowing an initially discounted message may be potentially accurate/inaccurate (as is true with bullshit, but not lies) does not result in the long-term discounting of that message. We discuss implications for marketing and other contexts of persuasion.     

Implicit and explicit COVID-19-vaccine harmfulness/helpfulness associations predict vaccine beliefs,intentions, and behaviors

We investigated the role of implicit and explicit associations between harm and COVID-19 vaccines using a large sample (N = 4668) of online volunteers. The participants completed a brief implicit association test and explicit measures to evaluate the extent to which they associated COVID-19 vaccines with concepts of harmfulness or helpfulness. We examined the relationship between these harmfulness/helpfulness COVID-19 vaccine associations and vaccination status, intentions, beliefs, and behavior. We found that stronger implicit and explicit associations that COVID-19 vaccines are helpful relate to vaccination status and beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccine. That is, stronger pro-helpful COVID-19 vaccine associations, both implicitly and explicitly, related to greater intentions to be vaccinated, more positive beliefs about the vaccine, and greater vaccine uptake.     

Intra- and interpersonal factors and adolescent wellbeing during COVID-19 in three countries

COVID-19 has altered adolescents' opportunities for developing and strengthening interpersonal skills and proficiencies. Using data from adolescents in Italy, the United States, and the United Kingdom, we examined the relation between internalizing symptoms assessed pre-pandemic or when pandemic-related restrictions were lifted (Time 1) and associated internalizing symptoms during a subsequent restrictive pandemic period (Time 2). Across all 3 countries, we found significant and consistent effect sizes in the relation between Time 1 and Time 2 internalizing symptoms. We further examined the direct and moderating impact of self-efficacy and contextual supports for adolescents' internalizing symptoms. Higher self-efficacy was associated with lower levels of internalizing symptoms at Time 2 in all 3 countries. Additionally, the relation between Time 1 and 2 internalizing symptoms was buffered by regulatory self-efficacy and peer support in Italy, but in the U.S., higher levels of general self-efficacy instead had an exacerbating effect on the relation between Times 1 and 2 internalizing symptoms. Results are discussed in the context of utilizing cross-national datasets to examine similarities in adolescent well-being over time and in the face of varying government responses to the pandemic.     

Social cohesion predicts COVID-19 vaccination intentions and uptake

COVID-19 vaccination is widely regarded as an individual decision, resting upon individual characteristics and demographic factors. In this research, we provide evidence that psychological group membership, and more precisely, social cohesion—a multidimensional concept that encompasses one's sense of connectedness to, and interrelations within, a group—can help us understand COVID-19 vaccination intentions (Study 1) and uptake (Study 2). Study 1 is a repeated-measures study with a representative sample of 3026 Australians. We found evidence that social cohesion can be conceptualised as a multidimensional structure; moreover, social cohesion at Wave 1 (early in the COVID-19) predicted greater vaccination intention and lower perceived risk of vaccination at Wave 2 (4 months later). In Study 2 (a cross-sectional study, N = 499), the multidimensional structure of social cohesion was associated with greater uptake of vaccine doses (in addition to willingness to receive further doses and perceived risk of the vaccine). These relations were found after controlling for a series of demographic (i.e., sex, age, income), health-related factors (i.e., subjective health; perceived risk; having been diagnosed with COVID-19), and individual differences (political orientation, social dominance orientation, individualism). These results demonstrate the need to go beyond individual factors when it comes to behaviours that protect groups, and particularly when examining COVID-19 vaccination—one of the most important ways of slowing the spread of the virus.     

Coping with COVID: Use,factor structure,and health behavior implications of specific emotion regulation strategies during the coronavirus pandemic

This series of studies examined U.S. individuals' use of specific emotion regulation/coping strategies during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, investigated the factor structure among strategies during this universally experienced stressor, and the extent to which these factors predicted engagement in COVID-related health-promoting behaviors. In Study 1, participants (N = 520) rated their use of 17 strategies for coping with pandemic-related stress during the past 24 h. Differences emerged in strategy use across demographic groups (age, race, income). Results of exploratory factor analysis suggest a factor structure grouping strategies in terms of goals beyond emotion regulation per se, rather than phases of the emotion process or a binary adaptive versus maladaptive distinction. In Study 2 (N = 264), participants reported daily on their coping strategy use and weekly on their engagement in COVID-specific health behaviors for 22 days. Results of confirmatory factor analysis replicate the factor structure found in Study 1. Some significant associations of coping strategy use with health-promoting behaviors were observed, but these were sporadic and largely involved baseline measures rather than predicting change over time. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.