Where should the balance be between “scientist” and “practitioner” in Australian undergraduate psychology?

The scientist—practitioner model of training in psychology has been widely influential in the development of undergraduate curricula in Australia. The model had its origins in post‐war America and has formed the basis for accreditation of psychology courses in Australia since the late 1970s. Recently a reconsideration of the model in Australian undergraduate psychology was argued for, suggesting that the absence of significant practical skills development in most curricula is detrimental to the discipline's graduates and their employers. The authors agree that the need for some practical skills development in undergraduate curricula is becoming increasingly important for psychology. Many of the exemplars of curriculum revision provided, however, are impractical and are unlikely to make significant contributions to Australian programs. There is an urgent need to consider the graduate attributes desired for 3‐year and 4‐year trained psychology graduates who will go on to employment without completing postgraduate study. Curriculum innovation to enhance graduates' employability will flow from this development, and will be likely to incorporate information technology solutions, rather than placement experience. This process is entirely compatible with the scientist—practitioner model of training and education in psychology.     

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).     

IS IT WORTH IT TO WIN THE TALENT WAR? EVALUATING THE UTILITY OF PERFORMANCE‐BASED PAY

Although the business press suggests that "winning the talent war," the attraction and retention of key talent, is increasingly pivotal to organization success, executives often report that their organizations do not fare well on this dimension. We demonstrate how, through integrating turnover and compensation research, the Boudreau and Berger (1985) staffing utility framework can be used by I-O psychologists and other HR professionals to address this issue. Employing a step-by-step process that combines organization-specific information about pay and performance with research on the pay-turnover linkage, we estimate the effects of incentive pay on employee separation patterns at various performance levels. We then use the utility framework to evaluate the financial consequences of incentive pay as an employee retention vehicle. The demonstration illustrates the limitations of standard accounting and behavioral cost-based approaches and the importance of considering both the costs and benefits associated with pay-for-performance plans. Our results suggest that traditional accounting or behavioral cost-based approaches, used alone, would have supported rejecting a potentially lucrative pay-for-performance investment. In addition, our approach should enable HR professionals to use research findings and their own data to estimate the retention patterns and subsequent financial consequences of their existing, and potential, company-specific performance-based pay policies.