Fairness Reactions to Selection Methods: An Italian study

This study examined the fairness reactions to 10 personnel selection methods in a sample of Italian students. University students (N=137) were asked to rate the favorability of these selection procedures and then to evaluate them on eight procedural justice dimensions. Work‐sample tests were the most favorably rated of the selection methods, followed by résumés, written ability tests, interviews and personal references. Graphology was perceived negatively. Opportunity to perform and the perceived face validity of selection procedures were the strongest procedural justice dimensions for predicting the process favorability ratings. The results of this study are compared with those from similar studies conducted in other countries. Similar results have been found in the various countries where such research has been conducted to date.     

Attributional Style and Engagement/Disengagement Responses in the Chinese Workforce

Internal attribution for bad events, along with stable and global attributions, has been regarded as a component of pessimism, a precursor of negative work outcomes. Most evidence in support of this conceptualisation has come from research conducted in individualist cultures. We questioned if internal attribution has the same pessimistic implication in a collectivist culture. Findings from two studies conducted on Chinese employees supported our expectations that the stability and globality dimensions (but not the internality dimension) would predict disengagement responses (such as quitting and being neglectful at work) and lack of engagement responses (such as voicing suggestions and being loyal to the organisation). A reconceptualisation of pessimism in the workplace is therefore necessary. A dimensional, rather than a composite, scoring method is proposed for maintaining the predictive and construct validities of attributional style as an indicator of pessimism.