Validation of the SASB Introject Surface in a Norwegian Clinical and Nonclinical Sample

Aronow, Reznikoff, and Moreland (this issue) have written a thoughtful contribution to the debate on the status of nomothetic and idiographic approaches to the Rorschach test. One of the interesting and attractive features of the current Rorschach er a is—as the Rorschach has experienced a resurgence of interest—the continuing interest in the foundations of the test and the historic antecedents to contemporary thought about the Rorschach (cf. Handler, 1994). One cannot consider Rorschach's seminal insights or those of the first and second generation and not deepen one's contemporary understanding and practice. In other words, the more you know about the test, the better "Rorschacher" you will be. This is witness to the test's utility and profundity. For this we may be grateful for the thought-provoking contribution of Aronow and his colleagues.     

A Meta‐Analytic Structural Model of Dispositonal Affectivity and Emotional Labor

The exponential growth of the service economy has increased the attention that organizational researchers have paid to the concept of emotional labor. Although much progress has been made in the field, few studies have provided an integrated picture of how individual dispositions, perceived display rules, and emotional labor behaviors shape employee outcomes. To clarify and compare results across this growing body of literature, a quantitative review was developed, along with a theoretically derived path diagram of key emotional labor constructs. Evidence from our structural meta‐analytic model based on 116 primary studies demonstrates that examining affective dispositions and emotional labor constructs and the pattern of positive and negative results helps to clarify and add specificity to the literature. Results were consistent with the perspective that surface acting emotion regulation strategies have a pattern of negative relationships with work outcomes of job satisfaction and stress/exhaustion (but not with job performance), whereas deep acting emotion regulation strategies have a pattern of positive relationships with all of these work outcomes.