Observed behaviors during clinical interviews predict improvement in depression

A considerable percentage of depressed patients do not respond to antidepressive treatment. Early indicators of prognosis are needed. The aims of this study are to examine (a) whether the interpersonal behavior of patients and psychiatrist, as assessed by means of direct observation of behavior during a baseline clinical interview, might have predictive value with respect to therapeutic outcome and (b) which predictive potency measures of psychomotor activation, as assessed by less refined methods, such as global clinical judgment, might have. In the analysis used, speech-pause behavior was taken as the basic structure of the interaction. The relations of other behaviors such as looking and hand and head movement with this structure were determined. Evidence is presented that in a group of 31 depressives, improvement after a period of 10 weeks was related to observed behaviors during a baseline interview. The behaviors of the patients are interpreted as relational or nonrelational. The relational behaviors (i.e., looking yesnodding, gesturing) occur less in patients who will improve, whereas the nonrelational behaviors (i.e., intensive body touching, head movements) occur more in these patients. The nonrelational behaviors are presumed to be indicative of the state of arousal. The predictive potency of these variables could not be explained by their relationship with the baseline severity of depression, which in itself also predicted improvement. Moreover, global clinical assessment of psychomotor activation (i.e., retardation and agitation) could not be related to outcome.     

Motivated information processing, strategic choice, and the quality of negotiated agreement

The authors tested a motivated information-processing model of negotiation: To reach high joint outcomes, negotiators need a deep understanding of the task, which requires them to exchange information and to process new information systematically. All this depends on social motivation, epistemic motivation (EM), and their interaction. Indeed, when EM (manipulated by holding negotiators process accountability or not) was high rather than low and prosocial rather than proself, negotiators recall more cooperative than competitive tactics (Experiment 1), had more trust, and reached higher joint outcomes (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 showed that under high EM, negotiators who received cooperative, rather than competitive, tactics reached higher joint outcomes because they engaged in more problem solving. Under low EM, negotiators made more concessions and reached low joint outcomes. Implications for negotiation theory and for future work in this area are discussed.     

Outcome interdependence shapes the effects of prevention focus on team processes and performance

Although the effects of regulatory focus on individual-level performance have often been studied, relatively little is yet known about team-level effects. Filling this void, we integrate the notion that promotion-focused individuals are concerned with progress and achievement, whereas prevention-focused individuals are concerned with security and vigilance, with the insight that team processes and performance depend on outcome interdependence (individual versus team rewards). The hypothesis that prevention-focused teams react more strongly than promotion-focused teams to differences in outcome interdependence was tested among 50 teams performing an interactive command-and-control simulation. Regulatory focus and outcome interdependence were both manipulated. The results showed that prevention-focused teams working for team rather than individual rewards reported higher work engagement and less error intolerance, coordinated more effectively, and performed better. Promotion-focused teams were not influenced by outcome interdependence. We discuss the implications of our results for theory and effective team management.     

The differential effects of solution-focused and problem-focused coaching questions on the affect,attentional control and cognitive flexibility of undergraduate students experiencing study-related stress

Previous research has demonstrated that Solution-Focused (SF) coaching can help individuals to attain positive outcomes. However, not much is known about the processes through which these positive outcomes are achieved. In two experiments, we subjected undergraduate students to either SF or Problem-Focused (PF) questions about their study-related problems. In Experiment 1, we hypothesized and found that SF questioning (as compared to PF questioning) leads to higher positive affect (H1a) and lower negative affect (H1b). Contrary to our expectations, SF questions did not lead to higher attentional control (H2). In Experiment 2, we aimed to replicate the hypotheses for positive and negative affect and additionally hypothesized that SF questioning leads to higher cognitive flexibility (H3a). The results supported these hypotheses. However, our hypothesis that the differential effects of SF and PF questioning on cognitive flexibility are mediated by positive affect (H3b) was not supported. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Does coaching work? A meta-analysis on the effects of coaching on individual level outcomes in an organizational context

Whereas coaching is very popular as a management tool, research on coaching effectiveness is lagging behind. Moreover, the studies on coaching that are currently available have focused on a large variety of processes and outcome measures and generally lack a firm theoretical foundation. With the meta-analysis presented in this article, we aim to shed light on the effectiveness of coaching within an organizational context. We address the question whether coaching has an effect on five both theoretically and practically relevant individual-level outcome categories: performance/skills, well-being, coping, work attitudes, and goal-directed self-regulation. The results show that coaching has significant positive effects on all outcomes with effect sizes ranging from g = 0.43 (coping) to g = 0.74 (goal-directed self-regulation). These findings indicate that coaching is, overall, an effective intervention in organizations.     

Why People Gossip: An Empirical Analysis of Social Motives,Antecedents, and Consequences

In 3 studies with student samples, we advance a social‐motivational approach to gossip. We developed the Motives to Gossip Questionnaire to distinguish negative influence, information gathering and validation, social enjoyment, and group protection as motives underlying gossip. Study 1 demonstrated that these motives can be distinguished empirically, and that the informational motive was the most prevalent reason to instigate gossip. Study 2 showed that group protection was especially important when the opportunity to gossip with a group member about another member's norm‐violating behavior was salient. Study 3 showed that when participants imagined someone gossiped to them about another group member's norm violation, and ascribed this to group protection, they rated the gossip as social and did not disapprove of it.     

Integrative and Distributive Negotiation in Small Groups: Effects of Task Structure, Decision Rule, and Social Motive

This study examined the interactive effects of task structure, decision rule, and social motive on small-group negotiation processes and outcomes. Three-person groups negotiated either within an asymmetrical task structure (in which a majority of group members have compatible interests) or within a symmetrical task structure (in which no such majority exists). Groups negotiated either under unanimity rule or under majority rule, and group members were either egoistically or prosocially motivated. Results revealed cumulative main effects and the predicted three-way interaction: Groups in an asymmetrical task structure engaged in more distributive and less integrative behavior, reached lower joint outcomes, and experienced a less positive group climate especially when they had an egoistic rather than prosocial motivation and unanimity rather than majority rule applied. Theoretical implications and avenues for future research are discussed.     

Team confidence,motivated information processing,and dynamic group decision making

According to the Motivated Information Processing in Groups (MIP‐G) model, groups should perform ambiguous (non‐ambiguous) tasks better when they have high (low) epistemic motivation and concomitant tendencies to engage in systematic (heuristic) information processing and exchange. The authors tested this prediction in an experiment with four‐person groups performing a complex and dynamic decision making task. Group confidence was measured after extensive training and prior to actual group decision‐making. Task ambiguity was manipulated. Results showed that when task ambiguity was low, group confidence indeed benefits decision quality and group performance. But when task ambiguity was high, group confidence hurt decision quality and group performance. Implications for theory and practice are discussed. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

On angry leaders and agreeable followers. How leaders' emotions and followers' personalities shape motivation and team performance

Do followers perform better when their leader expresses anger or when their leader expresses happiness? We propose that this depends on the follower's level of agreeableness. Anger is associated with hostility and conflict-states that are at odds with agreeable individuals' goals. Happiness facilitates affiliation and positive relations-states that are in line with agreeable individuals' goals. Accordingly, the two studies we conducted showed that agreeableness moderates the effects of a leader's emotional displays. In a scenario study, participants with lower levels of agreeableness responded more favorably to an angry leader, whereas participants with higher levels of agreeableness responded more favorably to a neutral leader. In an experiment involving four-person teams, teams composed of participants with lower average levels of agreeableness performed better when their leader expressed anger, whereas teams composed of participants with higher average levels of agreeableness performed better when their leader expressed happiness. Team performance was mediated by experienced workload, which was highest among agreeable followers with an angry leader. Besides having important practical implications, the findings shed new light on the fundamental question of how emotional expressions regulate social behavior.     

The primacy of perceiving: emotion recognition buffers negative effects of emotional labor

There is ample empirical evidence for negative effects of emotional labor (surface acting and deep acting) on workers' well-being. This study analyzed to what extent workers' ability to recognize others' emotions may buffer these effects. In a 4-week study with 85 nurses and police officers, emotion recognition moderated the relationship between emotional labor and work engagement: Workers with high emotion recognition engaging in emotional labor did not report lower work engagement after 4 weeks, whereas those with low emotion recognition did. These effects pertained to both surface and deep acting. The results suggest that emotional labor be not necessarily detrimental to workers' engagement. Instead, the impact of emotional labor hinges upon workers' ability to correctly identify interaction partners' emotions.