SEX-LINKED BIAS IN PROMOTION DECISIONS: The Role of Candidate's Career Relevance and Respondent's Prior Experience

To investigate the idea that information about relevant career experience has an effect on the degree of sex bias in promotion decisions, an analogue study was conducted in which sex of candidate and relevance of prior jobs were varied. The effect of respondent's experience of subordinacy to a female manager was also investigated. A within-subject design was used with two response formats, ranking and rating. As predicted, relevance of career experience was a primary consideration in the promotion decision. Respondents who had worked in the past under a female manager showed a profemale bias in choosing among candidates with relevant career experience. No sex-linked bias was identified in the treatment of the candidates with irrelevant prior experience. Additional results suggested that the ranking format was more sensitive to the effect of sex-linked bias than was the rating format.     

Public good provision in inter‐team conflicts: Effects of asymmetry and profit‐sharing rule

A fundamental problem in organizations is designing mechanisms for eliciting voluntary contributions from individual members of a team who are entrapped in a social dilemma. To solve the problem, we utilize a game‐theoretical framework that embeds the traditional within‐team social dilemma in a between‐team competition for an exogenously determined prize. In equilibrium, such competition enhances the incentive to contribute, thereby reducing free‐riding. Extending existing literature, we focus on asymmetric competitions between teams of unequal size, and competitions between more than two teams. Comparing two protocols for sharing the prize—egalitarian and proportional profit‐sharing rules—we find that (i) free‐riding diminishes and (ii) team members contribute more toward their team's effort when they belong to the larger team and when the profit‐sharing rule is proportional. (iii) Additionally, under the egalitarian profit‐sharing rule team members contribute more than predicted by the equilibrium solution. We discuss implications of our findings for eliciting contributions in competitive environments. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

On the positive and negative effects of self-efficacy on performance: Reward as a moderator

We address the controversy regarding the sign of the effect of self-efficacy on performance. We propose that when reward is high, self-efficacy has a positive effect on performance, whereas when reward is low, it has a negative effect. This hypothesis was tested in three experiments (with sample sizes of 76, 99, and 111) in which reward and self-efficacy were manipulated and performance was measured using different manipulations and tasks in both within-factor and between-factor designs. The results supported the hypothesis that reward moderates the effect of self-efficacy on performance. When reward was high, the effect of self-efficacy on performance was positive, whereas when reward was low, the effect of self-efficacy on performance was negative.     

General Mental Ability and pay: Nonlinear effects

While many studies have examined the linear relationship between intelligence and economic success, only few, if any, examined their nonlinear relationships. The current study examines such relationships in a large, nationally representative sample, using pay as an indicator of economic success. The results show that the effect of General Mental Ability (GMA) on pay depends on occupational complexity; the greater the complexity, the stronger the effect. They also show that, by and large, there is a marginally decreasing (concave) effect of GMA on pay. Methodological and practical questions concerning the relationship between cognitive ability and pay are discussed.     

Negotiation as a form of persuasion: arguments in first offers

In this article we examined aspects of negotiation within a persuasion framework. Specifically, we investigated how the provision of arguments that justified the first offer in a negotiation affected the behavior of the parties, namely, how it influenced counteroffers and settlement prices. In a series of 4 experiments and 2 pilot studies, we demonstrated that when the generation of counterarguments was easy, negotiators who did not add arguments to their first offers achieved superior results compared with negotiators who used arguments to justify their first offer. We hypothesized and provided evidence that adding arguments to a first offer was likely to cause the responding party to search for counterarguments, and this, in turn, led him or her to present counteroffers that were further away from the first offer.     

The Measurement of Perimenstrual Distress

This study was undertaken to explore whether the implicit requirement of phase comparison in menstrual research influences the data obtained. One hundred fifty Israeli women responded to the Menstrual Distress Questionnaire in an altered procedure. They rated their experience of behaviors and feelings during the nonmenstrual phase. Later, on a separate form, they rated their experience of the same behaviors and feelings during the menstrual and premenstrual phases. With this altered procedure, nonmenstrual distress scores were consistently higher than the perimenstrual scores. This pattern of results is the reverse of what most studies using the questionnaire have shown and does not seem to justify treating the perimenstrual period as especially problematic.     

Cognitive versus Non‐Cognitive Individual Differences and the Dynamics of Career Success

We examine the effects of cognitive and non‐cognitive individual differences on the dynamics of career success (i.e. pay, occupational status) by comparing temporal changes in the validities of two measures of personality—Core Self Evaluations and the Big Five personality dimensions—to temporal changes in the validities of two standard intelligence tests. The main finding of two studies based on large representative samples is that the validity of intelligence clearly increases over time, whereas the validity of personality tends to be stable, indicating that intelligence, but not personality, drives career success.