Expectancy,value, and attitudinal semantics

A novel single-attribute test between competing expectancy-value models of attitude was devised using subjects' ratings of clusters of statements located at a range of points within a three-dimensional semantic space with expectancy, value and attitude as the co-ordinates. The data provided strongest support for a model using bipolar scoring for evaluation and unipolar scoring for expectancy.     

CANDIDATE PERSISTENCE AND PERSONALITY TEST PRACTICE EFFECTS: IMPLICATIONS FOR STAFFING SYSTEM MANAGEMENT

Candidates persist in selection settings for numerous reasons, prompting several concerns regarding staffing-system management. Predictors of the propensity to retest and personality test practice effects were investigated among a sample of 15,338 candidates who applied for supervisory positions (and 357 who repeated the selection process) over a 4-year period with a large organization in the service industry. Results reveal greater likelihood of retesting among internal candidates and overall evidence of small-to-moderate personality test practice effects. Compared to passing candidates who retested for various reasons, failing candidates pursued alternative response strategies upon retesting and generated dimension-level practice effects that reached .40 to .60, whereas passing candidates generally replicated their initial profiles. For several subscales, low initial scores were associated with practice effects that exceeded a full standard deviation. Implications for research, practice, and policy are discussed.     

Perceiving low self‐esteem in close others impedes capitalization and undermines the relationship

Disclosing positive experiences to others (i.e., “capitalization”) is associated with personal and interpersonal benefits (Gable & Reis, 2010). Unfortunately, people who perceive low self‐esteem (LSE) in close others are reluctant to capitalize, holding back from those they expect will be unsupportive (MacGregor & Holmes, 2011). In Study 1, we extend previous findings by demonstrating the importance of the type of experience disclosed; participants capitalized less positively with an (ostensibly) LSE friend when disclosing an accomplishment, not a positive experience attributed to happenstance. In Study 2, we demonstrate the external validity of the phenomenon by examining real discussions between romantic partners. Participants capitalized less positively with their LSE partner, behavior associated with lower relationship satisfaction 6 weeks later (particularly for women).