A comparison of computer routines for the calculation of the tetrachoric correlation coefficient

In calculations of the discriminating-power parameter of the normal ogive model, Bock and Lieberman compared estimates derived from their maximum-likelihood solution with those derived from the heuristic solution. The two sets of estimates were in excellent agreement provided the heuristic solution used accurate tetrachoric correlation coefficients. Three computer methods for the calculation of the tetrachoric correlation were examined for accuracy and speed. The routine by Saunders was identified as an acceptably accurate method for calculating the tetrachoric correlation coefficient.This research was supported in part by NSF Grant E 1930 to The University of Chicago. The author wishes to thank Dr. David R. Saunders and Dr. Ledyard Tucker for the use of their original materials and Dr. R. Darrell Bock for his many helpful suggestions and his ready counsel throughout the course of this investigation.     

Aspects of language pragmatics and the social perception of lying

Two experiments were conducted in order to examine the influence of linguistic and extralinguistic variables on the attribution of lying. In the first experiment, one of two tape recordings of a target person, who responded either true or false to a list of adjectives, was evaluated by 83 subjects. The subjects' task was to attempt to discover when the target person was not telling the truth. The stimulus tapes were constructed such that the time between the adjective and the target person's response was systematically varied and the adjectives varied on the likability of a person possessing that trait. Overall, it was found that if the target person responded either too quickly or too slowly the subjects attributed his response as a lie more often than if the delay was more intermediate in duration (p<0.01). The adjective likability value in combination with the true or false response of the target person also contributed to the attribution of lying (p<0.01). In the second experiment, the adjectives were rescaled on another dimension thought to influence the attribution of lying: the degree to which the adjective is true of the general population. The results suggest that this new scale is related to the degree to which lie attributions are made.This research was supported in part by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development under Research Grant 1 P01 HD-01762-01 and the National Institute of Mental Health under Research Grant MN 08260.     

Cumulative Advantage: Conductors and Insulators of Heavy‐Tailed Productivity Distributions and Productivity Stars

We use the metatheoretical principle of cumulative advantage as a framework to understand the presence of heavy‐tailed productivity distributions and productivity stars. We relied on 229 datasets including 633,876 productivity observations collected from approximately 625,000 individuals in occupations including research, entertainment, politics, sports, sales, and manufacturing, among others. We implemented a novel methodological approach developed in the field of physics to assess the precise shape of the productivity distribution rather than relying on a normal versus nonnormal artificial dichotomy. Results indicate that higher levels of multiplicity of productivity, monopolistic productivity, job autonomy, and job complexity (i.e., conductors of cumulative advantage) are associated with a higher probability of an underlying power law distribution, whereas lower productivity ceilings (i.e., insulator of cumulative advantage) are associated with a lower probability. In addition, higher levels of multiplicity of productivity, monopolistic productivity, and job autonomy were associated with a greater proportion of productivity stars (i.e., productivity distributions with heavier tails), whereas lower productivity ceilings were associated with a smaller proportion of productivity stars (i.e., productivity distributions with lighter tails). Results serve as a building block for future theory development and testing efforts aimed at understanding why, when, and how the distribution of individual productivity may follow a nonnormal curve—and to what extent. We also discuss implications for organizations and management in terms of the design and implementation of human resource systems (e.g., selection, training, compensation), as well as for individuals interested in becoming productivity stars themselves.     

Commentary on Steven H. Cooper’s Paper “Blurring Boundaries or Why Do We Refer to Sexual Misconduct With Patients as ‘Boundary Violation’”

In this commentary on Steven H. Cooper’s paper, the author acknowledges that the term boundary violation presents a vexing problem when we try to integrate it with the traditional use of the term boundary in psychoanalytic thought. He suggests that the two discourses represent two separate but somewhat related levels of discourse and that overlap occurs in some areas but not in others. While the use of “boundary violations” to describe ethical misconduct presents problems, the author suggests that it may be useful for some analysts who have experienced a collapse of analytic space and can no longer “play” in a symbolic realm. He also suggests that we may be stuck with the term because of the unconscious function it serves for the analytic community.     

Development and Validation of the Workplace Age Discrimination Scale

Purpose

Workplace age discrimination research is proliferating, but researchers lack a valid measure with which to capture targets’ discriminatory experiences. We developed a measure of perceived workplace age discrimination that assesses overt and covert forms of discrimination and then compared older, middle-aged, and younger workers’ experiences.

Design/Methodology

In Study 1, we developed the Workplace Age Discrimination Scale (WADS) based on older workers’ experiences using a deductive approach, a qualitative study, and two quantitative surveys. In Study 2, we validated the measure among young employees using a qualitative and two quantitative surveys. In Study 3, we tested the WADS among middle-aged workers and tested models of invariance between age groups.

Findings

Participants frequently endorsed covert discriminatory experiences, which the WADS reflects. The WADS contains convergent and discriminant validity, high reliability, and a unidimensional structure across age groups. It demonstrates criterion-related validity among older and younger workers but not middle-aged workers, given their low experiences of age discrimination. Age discrimination frequency follows a U-shaped pattern across age groups.

Implications

Researchers can use the WADS to identify long-term outcomes of age discrimination and to further compare workers’ discriminatory experiences. Practitioners and policymakers can use the measure to develop interventions to ameliorate workplace age discrimination and inform policymaking.

Originality/Value

The WADS is the first validated measure of targets’ perspectives of workplace age discrimination. Our results challenge assumptions that only older workers experience age discrimination (younger workers’ means were highest) and that age discrimination is usually overt in nature (it is often covert).