PSY 272- Week 4/5 Notes
PSY 272- Week 4/5 Notes PSY 272
Popular in Introduction to Industrial-Organizational Psychology
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Psychlogy
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
This 12 page Class Notes was uploaded by Derek Notetaker on Saturday September 26, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to PSY 272 at Purdue University taught by Caitlin M Porter in Summer 2015. Since its upload, it has received 33 views. For similar materials see Introduction to Industrial-Organizational Psychology in Psychlogy at Purdue University.
Reviews for PSY 272- Week 4/5 Notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 09/26/15
Psy 272 Intro to IO Psych Week 45 Notes gt quotquotquotI missed posting last week but I m including all week 4 notes in this week s set two for one Therefore this document is LONG but hopefully these are useful for you guys Start of Week 4 Notes Review topics that the teacher emphasized from preVious lectures 0 g Spearman and general intelligence 0 Factor Analysis 0 Thurstone Fluid and Crystallized intelligence 0 Triarchic model of g Carroll Bandwidth vs Fidelity bandwidth is the breadth of the test 0 delity is the speci city of the test Incremental Validity the relationship between predictors IVs that predict an increase in R2 0 When IVs are similar in nature the change in R2 is minimal the area of the DV that is covered by all IVs 0 When IVs are dissimilar in nature the change in R2 is far greater The Dark Side of Individual difference 0 The Race Gap 0 1015 point gaps in IQ test scores eg whites blacks asians 0 This is referred to as the diversityvalidity dilemma Personality A person s characteristic way of thinking feeling and behaving that generalizes across a wide variety of situations 0 Walter Mischel l968 believed that situations dominate personality making it impractical to measure personality 0 Both Mischel and personality experts are correct Situation does in uence personality and vice versa 0 Guion and Gottier 1965 demonstrated that personality was a poor predictor of job performance as a result personality research was largely left alone for years What makes the construct of personality difficult 0 Personality is more uid than g and therefore more difficult to tie down 0 Terminology confusion this is referred to as the Jingle Jangle Fallacy 0 J J Fallacy simply put the use of different words to describe the exact same thing or the use of the same words to describe completely different things Was that simple I hope so The Big Five A history 0 Sir Francis Galton 1884 Lexical Hypothesis 0 A fascinating link 0 httpwwwpersonalityprojectorgrevellepublicationsgaltonpdf Thurstone developed 60 adjectives for personality 0 Allport and Odbert 4500 words for personality 0 Cattell shortened 4500 words into 16 factors 0 Tupes and Christal Narrowed 16 into 5 factors 0 Norman replicated Tupes and Christal s finding 0 Goldberg Costa and McCrae l980 s THE B5 A way to remember the B5 0 OCEAN Openness to Experience 0 Conscientiousness 0 Extraversion 0 Agreeableness Neuroticism 0 Or if you prefer CANOE that works too Facets of the B5 0 Openness to Experience 0 intelligence imagination curiosity Conscientiousness dependability organization skills Extraversion sociability energy Agreeableness cooperation kindness trust willingness to comply Neuroticism how moody you are 0 calm relaxation anxiousness Barrick and Mount 1981 Metaanalysis correlation between Job Performance and the B5 0 The actual study httppeopletamuedumbarrickPubs 199 lB arrickMountpdf 0 0 O3 0 C 23 0 E 10 0 A 06 N 07 In other words conscientiousness is the holy grail of the B5 in terms of predicting job performance Criticisms of the B5 0 They are not comprehensive measures of personality 0 The factors are so generalized that they are confoundedaffected by other factors that tie into personality 0 Examples of other personality traits 0 Machiavellianism cunning deceptive especially in advancing oneself Narcissism extreme absorption in oneself Optimism we all know what optimism is A random sidenote provided in lecture the B5 have components to them For example 0 Extraversion Social Vitality and Social Dominance Conscientiousness Achievement and Dependability When mixing the BS Integrity Tests 0 By taking the good parts of C A and N of the B5 integrity tests can be formed These tests correlate to job performance with r46 A big positive of personality measures they are considered for the most part colorblind blind to socioeconomic status blind to religion etc There ARE however small differences between men and women personality types in general BandwidthFidelity again 0 Incremental Validity is largely increased through speci city dissimilarity of IVs as discussed earlier in the notes 0 CriterionRelated Validity 0 When measuring for broad outcomes focus on the bandwidth of the test as that will better predict broad outcomes 0 When measuring for specific outcomes focus on the fidelity of the test The Last Issue Concerning Personality Tests Faking 0 Despite the ability of individuals to successfully fake their way through personality tests the validity of the correlation between job performance and personality is largely unaffected In other words let them cheat they re not really hurting anything 0 There is research being done that is attempting to create fakeproof tests of personality 0 A term to remember in relation to this forcedchoice options Things to remember about Personality 0 While the B5 are good conscientiousness is the best in terms of predicting job performance 0 Personality can be used in conjunction with g Moving on from Personality The definition of BIAS FAIRNESS and the effect of CULTURE in testing in terms of IO Psychology 0 Bias when a test systematically over or underpredicts for a given subgroup Faimess a value judgement about actions or decisions based on test scores 0 Culture to what extent has the test taker had the opportunity to become familiar with a test s material 0 For example an immigrant from Indonesia comes to America and is tested on American history upon his or her arrival would their culture affect the scores they received on the test 0 Keep in mind that knowing the definition of this term will most likely be more useful than remembering my example 0 Designing culturefree test items is important Biodata instruments designed to collect biographical information from job applicants 0 Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior 0 JP 34 0 Supervisor Ratings 37 0 Promotion 26 0 Training success 3 Problems with Biodata 0 What is being measured 0 If biodata is based upon biographical information then the measures being assessed change from person to person 0 Fairness 0 If the measures change from person to person then are they fair 0 Faking 0 Construct Validity 0 What construct is being assessed and if thats unclear how can we assess its validity Situational Judgment Tests 0 Measure more contextuallybased reasoning than cognitive ability tests By looking at for example social competence emotional intelligence con ict management skills leadership skills etc 0 These can be administered through pencil and paper but with changes in technology using computervideo is becoming more common 0 SJ Ts can be confounded by g however SJ Ts have incremental validity that is greater than both personality and g Biodata vs SJ Ts 0 Biodata focuses on past actions 0 SJ Ts focuses on future actions 0 can be combined through several methods including 0 factor analysis 39 empirical keying 0 rationalizationtheory Empirically Keying 0 Spaghetti Method throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks 0 Just give people a lot of SJ Ts and see which ones best predict job performance Factor Analysis 0 Design a massive test and then determine what items hang together Those items define a dimension and the strongest items for a dimension are kept Rationalization Theory 0 Design biodata SJ T items based on a theory or eXpert judgements job analysis required rst Different Types of Interviews 0 Jobrelated vs Conversational 0 focuses on job vs focuses on applicant 0 Structure vs Unstructured 0 set of questions vs random questions 0 behavioral vs situational 0 past experiences vs future eXperiences The interview that MOST correlates with job performance Job related 56 0 Structured 50 0 Situational 39 All of these provide an incremental validity over g Good Practices in Interviewing 0 Rate each question rather than the interview as a whole 0 Take good notes 0 Having multiple interviewers can provide more effective ratings on candidates in some situations 0 Train interviewers to know what they re looking for Assessment Centers Today 0 Based upon job analysis researchers run participants through multiple assessments simulations and systematically record behaviors of all participants 0 Based upon observations of what the researchers deem to be workrelevant material they determine who best fits into the role they are trying to fill 0 AC validities in relation to 0 JP 37 0 g 67 Openness to Experience 5 0 Extraversion 5 To take away from the week 4 notes the methodsassessment tools 0 Biodata 0 SJ Ts 0 Interviews 0 Assessment centers That is the end of Week 4 Notes Are you tired of IO yet Yes TOO BAD There s more where that came from Start of Week 5 Notes JOB PERFORMANCE JP is generally focused on how to predict performance 0 An early IO example of this Scienti c Management 0 Job performance is used to not only assess potentialcurrent employee performance it is also used to validate the testing done in prehiring practices 0 The Definition of JP Actions or behaviors relevant to the organization s goals 0 it is what people do not their results their results are what is referred to as Effectiveness Performance based on what employees do Effectiveness based on the results of performance Productivity effectivenesscost ratio Assessing JP 0 The Criterion Problem JP is the Ultimate Criterion of IO psych however we re still unsure on how to accurately assess JP 0 Ultimate Criterion the ultimate criterion is Job Performance but obtaining the true Ultimate Criterion for any job is impossible Ultimate vs Actual Criterion The actual criterion are our measures in relation to assessing Job Performance The Ultimate Criterion is a theoretical construct the true construct of JP for a particular work environment The following chart should look highly familiar Actual Criterion JP De ciency Contamination Relevance Criterion Types 0 Hard scales objective measurements 0 Soft supervisor and coworker ratings subjective measurements 0 Neither of these measure the UC ultimate criterion effectively John Campbell s model of performance involves eight components 0 jobspeci c task proficiency nonj obspecific task performance 0 written and oral communication 0 demonstrating effort 0 maintaining personal discipline 0 facilitating team performance 0 supervisionleadership managementadministration The three highlighted components are used in all jobs and need to be MEMORIZED Determinants of Performance 1 Declarative Knowledge understanding what is required to complete a job 2 Procedural Knowledge knowing how to perform a job 3 Motivation choosing to work A diagram explaining the multiplicative nature of the determinants of JP DeClaratiVe Procedure Knowledge Knowledge Motivation gt quotquot In other words the three determinants of l performance are multiplicative amongst one another But the first two determinants are directly Ability moderated by variables such as ability g and personality Borman and Motowidlo s Model of JP 0 Contextual Performance more discretionary than task performance and also includes organizational citizenship behaviors OCBs 0 Some facets of OCBs Conscientious Initiative developing own skills 0 Organizational Support Demonstrating loyalty within and outside of the organization 0 Personal Support helping others within the organization Types of OCBs OCBO behaviors that happen within the context of the organization 0 OCBI behaviors that happen within the context of interpersonal relationships gt quot Intelligence is the best predictor of JP however contextual performance is better through contextual measures such as personality rather than g Counterproductive Work Behaviors CWBs 0 all forms of deviant behaviors theft harassment etc Sackett s Model of CWBs Interpersonal Deviance Organizational Deviance Property Deviance Production Deviance Harassment verbal abuse Theft Sabotage Absfmce Tardmess Sloppiness Name to know Reeshad Delal Purdue 0 According to his metaanalysis relationships between OCBs and CWBs are not inherently on opposite sides of the spectrum meaning that it is common for employees to exhibit both CWBs and OCBs Determinants of CWBs 0 Emotional stability agreeableness conscientiousness Agreeableness CWBI interpersonal deviance Conscientiousness CWBO organizational deviance 0 Perceived unfairness 0 Aggression Employee Withdrawal Considered a type of CWB 0 Important to distinguish between voluntary and involuntary withdrawal 0 work withdrawal remain in job 0 job withdrawal firingquitting job Progressive Model of Withdrawal Baby steps compound upon one another and lead up to eventual withdrawal from organization This model includes outside variables such as economic downturns and the job market Harrison Newman Roth Metaanalysis 2006 0 httpwwwbusinessunredufacultysimmonsbmgt486amjjobattitudespdf 0 Key Takeaway 0 There are multiple ways to de ne the criterion of JP as well as multiple ways to assess overall job attitude OCBs and CWBs I recommend looking at the various charts the study itself provides as the correlations provided are interesting Quick Review of things to know so far through Week 5 0 Difference between JP and effectiveness 0 Definition of the criterion problem 0 Relevance Deficiency Contamination 0 Criterion Types 0 Hard Soft Campbell s Theory 0 Declarative knowledge Procedural knowledge and Motivation 0 eight components 3 special ones 0 Task vs Contextual Performance 0 CWBs OCBs 0 Job vs Work withdrawal Continuing deep breath Another type of J P Adaptive Performance AP 0 AP exibilityadaptability with changing circumstances 0 Determinants of AP 5 0 Achievement Motivation Typical vs Maximal Performance 0 Typical Performance determined by motivation 0 maximal performance determined by human capital KSAOs honeymoon effect an individual performs well over the rst six months or so and then performance begins to decline Issue of Dynamic Criteria 0 JP may change over time even without role changes or additional duties added to one s job 0 Kevin Murphy s Stages 0 Transition stage in uenced by g Where individuals learn the new tasks and skills required to perform well 0 Maintenance stage in uenced by personality Where individuals focus on applying all that they have already learned 0 The transition stage obviously is the learning stage and therefore occurs first implying that performance over long periods of time is better determined by personality while maximal performance over the short term is better predicted by g gt quotquot Note The acronym KSAOs stands for knowledge skills abilities and other characteristics The simpler way to say this is human capital Performance Variability 0 performance uctuates 0 sports teams with the most consistent players win more games 0 this implies that what is even more important than g which predicts maximal performance is personality which helps to predict typical performance SO what kinds of performance does g best predict 0 Task performance 0 Maximal Performance 0 Performance during the transition stage What kinds of performance does personality best predict Contextual performance 0 Typical performance 0 Performance during the maintenance stage Definition of Job Analysis 0 How we define what JP is for speci c jobs Realistic Job Previews 0 They do not sugar coat their pitch to potential employees and sometimes require applicants to spend time observing someone else on the job 0 These methods are good for recruiting as they generally increase commitment and satisfaction within the organization 0 According to Caitlyn our teacher more information is available on pg 5 7 2 of the textbook I RECOMMEND CHECKING IT OUT Sounds like a bonus question if I ve ever heard of one Job LadderJ ob Family 0 A job ladderfamily is a cluster of positions that are similar in terms of the human attributes needed to be successful These allow the organization to identify logical career paths Terms to know 0 Job evaluation used for pay decisionscomparisons Compensable Factors factors that can be linked to compensation 0 Comparable Worth pg 193 of text in essence a person should be paid in accordance with their worth in the organization Common uses for job analysis 0 Streamlining jobs 0 creating new positions 0 Reduction of unneeded jobs 0 criterion development 0 development of JP as a construct Litigation 0 legal defensibility of a personnel selection tool requires validity evidence 0 this validity evidence comes from processes such as job analysis the first step to providing a solid defense is to provide knowledge of critical tasks and attributes related to the job THAT is the end of Week 5 Notes gt quotquot I ve done my best with what has been presented in lecture but I don t believe Caitlyn is updating her slides in Blackboard and she ies through a TON of slides in lecture so it is generally a good policy to attend class when possible Hopefully you guys will find these notes useful