Motivation,altruism, and generalized compliance: a field study of organizational citizenship behaviors

This study tests the relations among five sources of motivation and two organizational citizenship behaviors. 175 employees from 31 locations of two agriculturally based companies completed the Motivation Sources Inventory and were rated by their supervisors for demonstrated organizational citizenship behaviors. There were significant positive correlations for employees' Self-concept-Internal Motivation with Altruistic Behavior of employees; while employees' Self-concept-External Motivation showed a significant negative relation with Altruistic Behavior by employees. Surprisingly, no correlation between employees' Goal Internalization Motivation and Altruistic Behavior by employees was found. Interpretation of these findings and further research are suggested.     

The logical structure of linguistic commitment II: Systems of relevant commitment entailment

In The Logical Structure of Linguistic Commitment I (The Journal of Philosophical Logic 23 (1994), 369–400), we sketch a linguistic theory (inspired by Brandom's Making it Explicit) which includes an expressivist account of the implication connective, : the role of is to make explicit the inferential proprieties among possible commitments which proprieties determine, in part, the significances of sentences. This motivates reading (A B) as commitment to A is, in part, commitment to B. Our project is to study the logic of . LSLC I approximates (A B) as anyone committed to A is committed to B, ignoring issues of whether A is relevant to B. The present paper includes considerations of relevance, motivating systems of relevant commitment entailment related to the systems of commitment entailment of LSLC I. We also consider the relevance logics that result from a commitment reading of Fine's semantics for relevance logics, a reading that Fine suggests.     

Quantification and semantic memory

Two models are considered for how people verify explicitly quantified sentences, such as All fathers are parents and Some fathers are parents. The models share the same second stage, but have different first-stage mechanisms. In the Predicate Intersection Model, suggested by Meyer (1970), the first stage involves a serial, self-terminating search among names of categories that intersect the predicate category. In the Feature Comparison Model (Smith, Shoben & Rips, 1974a), the first stage involves evaluating the overall relatedness between the subject and predicate categories by comparing their semantic features. To test the models, three reaction time experiments required subjects to verify statements quantified by Some or All. In the first experiment, the semantic relatedness of categories in false Some-statements was varied. Contrary to predictions of the Predicate Intersection Model, related categories increased reaction time for both true and false Some-statements. While the first experiment revealed that All-statements took longer to verify than comparable Some-statements, the second experiment demonstrated that the All-Some difference can be eliminated by presenting both statement types in the same block of trials, also disconfirming the Predicate Intersection Model. Finally, Experiment III examined the meaning of Some-statements in more detail by having subjects interpret the quantifier Some as “some but not all.” With this interpretation, Some-statements took longer to verify than All-statements. Overall the results support the Feature Comparison Model.     

Effects of situational cues on prism-induced aftereffects

A test was made of the hypothesis that external stimuli present during exposure to lateral displacement of the visual field can serve as situational cues whose presence or absence will influence the magnitude of aftereffects manifested subsequent to adaptation resulting from the exposure. The results indicated that the relative aftereffects were significantly greater when thenondisplacing goggles were worn during the periods in which aftereffect measurements were taken than was the case when they were removed during these test periods. The finding that manipulation of certain cues, i.e., the restriction of the visual field, weight, etc., of the goggles, associated with the adaptation period can in part determine the size of observed aftereffects provides evidence in support of the notion that aftereffects can be conditioned to precisely given constellations of stimuli In addition, the need for caution in conceptualizing aftereffects as simply the persistence of adaptive shifts once visual displacement has been terminated is suggested.     

Development and convergent validation of a methodology for estimating cross-job retraining times

Cross-jobtransferability of skills is defined in terms of the ease with which individuals can apply knowledge and skills acquired in a previous job in learning to perform a new job. This study reports the development of a prototype methodology for estimating retraining times based on analyses of transferability of skills. Using this methodology which assesses interjob similarity in task content and task learning time, times to retrain across 41 different U.S. Air Force enlisted jobs were estimated. Convergent validities of retraining time estimates were tested in terms of correlations with differences in jobs': (a) general job learning difficulty, and (b) aptitude requirements. Results supported predictions that cross-job retraining time would be longer (a)into jobs that generally aremore difficult to learn, (b)from jobs that generally areless difficult to learn, and (c) across jobs having different, rather than similar, aptitude requirements. Implications for training, human resources planning, and coping with increasingly rapid technological changes in the workplace are discussed.Research sponsored by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research/AFSC, United States Air Force, under contract F49620-87-R-0004. The United States Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation hereon.     

How big is big? Relative and absolute properties in memory

Previous studies of semantic memory have overlooked an important distinction among so-called “property statements”. Statements with relative adjectives (e.g., Flamingos are big) imply a comparison to a standard or reference point associated with an immediate superordinate category (a flamingo is big for a bird), while the truth of statements with absolute adjectives (e.g., Flamingos are pink) is generally independent of such a standard. To examine the psychological consequences of this distinction, we asked subjects in Experiment 1 to verify sentences containing either relative or absolute adjectives embedded in either predicate-adjective (PA) constructions (e.g., A flamingo is big (pink)) or predicate-noun (PN) constructions (e.g. A flamingo is a big (pink) bird), where the predicate noun was the immediate superordinate. Reaction times (RTs) and errors for relative sentences decreased when the superordinate was specified, but remained constant for absolute sentences. These data also suggest that the truth value of relative sentences depends, not just on the superordinate, but also on a more global standard for everyday, human-oriented objects. Experiment 2 extends these results in showing that ratings of the truth of relative sentences are a function of the difference in size between an instance and its superordinate standard (e.g., between the size of a flamingo and that of an average bird) and the difference between the instance and the standard for everyday objects. Experiment 3 replicated these findings using reaction time as the dependent measure.     

Intrinsic Motivation and norms about payment1

Several previous studies have shown that rewarding individuals for preforming an interesting task may have an inhibitory effect on tast satisfaction and persistence. In this experiment, an extrinsic reward decreased task satisfaction and persistence when a norm for no payment existed, but the inhibitory effect was not found when a norm for payment was associated with the task. This result is discussed in terms of the “means-ends” theoretical perspective developed by Calder and Straw (1975b) as well as other dcompeting explanations.