Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： Evaluation mode is an important yet under-studied aspect of decision-making. All decisions are made in one of two evaluation modes or some mix of the two. One is joint evaluation (JE), in which different options are presented together and evaluated simultaneously. The other is single evaluation (SE), in which different options are presented separately, and each option is evaluated in isolation. This article reviews existing literature on how JE and SE can lead to reversed preferences, with one option favored in JE and another option favored in SE, in domains including hiring, consumer choice, moral judgments and healthcare decisions. For example, in JE, a plain-looking but experienced job candidate would be favored over a good-looking but less-experienced job candidate, but in SE, the good-looking but less experienced candidate would be favored. We also review existing research on the “less is better” phenomenon-that in SE (but not in JE), a normatively less valuable option is judged more favorably than its more valuable alternative. For example, in SE (but not in JE), 7 oz. of ice cream served in a 5-oz. cup is valued more favorably than 8 oz. of ice cream served in a 10-oz. cup. To interpret JE/SE preference reversals and the less-is-better effect, several explanations have been proposed, such as a want/should conflict, a within-category versus between-category comparison, the option as information model, and the dual-process model. The present review focuses on the general evaluability theory (GET), which ascribes JE/SE preference reversals and the less-is-better effect to attribute evaluability. According to GET, the evaluability of an attribute depends conjunctively on three factors: evaluation mode (JE versus SE), knowledge of the decision-maker about the attribute, and the inherent/learned nature of the attribute. Not only can GET explain JE/SE preference reversals and the less-is-better effect, it also explains many other effects, such as scope neglect, differences in risk preference between JE and SE, differences in time preference between JE and SE, misprediction of future hedonic experiences, and so on. Understanding JE-SE differences and attribute evaluability also offers insight into how to improve decisions in contexts such as fundraising, pricing strategy, public service, and subjective well-being. |||The review suggests that evaluation mode (JE versus SE) is an important independent variable that influences a wide range of decisions in counterintuitive ways and thereby provides opportunities to design choice-architecture-based nudges to improve decisions. Yet despite its importance, evaluation mode has not been well-studied and therefore is a fertile ground for researchers to explore and develop.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： In the current age, employees are expected to work proactively in workplaces where the organizational structure is flatter and knowledge updating becomes faster than ever. There is a growing consensus on the importance of proactive behaviors from both scholars and practitioners. Proactive behavior, defined as “an anticipatory action that employees take to impact themselves and/or their environments” is thought to be self-initiated, future-oriented and change-oriented. Evidence showed that employees’ proactive behavior is beneficial for both individual performance and organizational competitiveness. Existing research regarding the impacts of proactive behavior mainly focuses on effectiveness of employees’ own proactive behaviors, such as promoting their job satisfaction or organizational commitment. However, no one is an isolated island. In a team or an organizational environment, employees’ attitudes and behaviors will inevitably be affected by their coworkers. Accordingly, this study focused on coworker proactive behavior and discussed its effectiveness in stimulating employees’ job performance. Drawing upon social learning theory, we hypothesized employee autonomous motivation will mediate the relationship between coworker proactive behavior and employee job performance. We further assumed that whether an employee possesses highly proactive personality determines the odds that employees might be motivated by their proactive coworkers. These hypotheses were tested with a field sample of supervisor-employee dyads and an experimental study. For the field study, we conducted a three-wave research design and achieved 209 valid samples from employees and their supervisors in two high-tech enterprises based in Beijing and Hebei provinces. At Time 1, employees assessed their proactive personality and their coworkers’ proactive behavior, and provided their demographic information. At Time 2 (one month after Time 1), employees were asked to report their autonomous motivation. At Time 3 (two months after Time 1), supervisors provided performance evaluation of employees who engaged in the survey. For the experimental study, we recruited 86 full-time workers from a high-tech company located in Hebei province via its internal communication channel. These respondents were separated into two groups randomly, namely coworkers with high proactive behaviors (N = 74) and coworkers with low proactive behaviors (N = 76). First, respondents were asked to finish a measure of their proactive personality and report their demographics. Then, they were given a scenario, one of which depicted a situation where coworkers were proactive (or not proactive). Finally, after reading the scenario, respondents finished a manipulation check of coworker proactive behavior and reported the degree of their autonomous motivation. We applied confirmatory factor analysis, regression analysis and mixed model via SPSS 23 and Mplus 7.4 to analyze the data. Empirical results supported our hypotheses and indicated the following: (1) Coworker proactive behavior had a significant positive effect on employee autonomous motivation; (2) Employee autonomous motivation played a mediating role in the relationship between coworker proactive behavior and employee job performance; (3) Employee proactive personality played a moderating role in the relationship between coworker proactive behavior and employee autonomous motivation, such that coworker proactive behavior was positively related employee autonomous motivation when employees’ proactive personality was high, while such relationship became negative when employees’ proactive personality was low. This study makes several theoretical and managerial implications. First, by investigating the effectiveness of coworker proactive behavior, this study offers a new insight in proactive behavior research by incorporating the influence of coworker into consideration. Second, by examining the mediating role of employee autonomous motivation, this study enhances our understanding of how coworker proactive behavior translates into employee job performance. Third, by exploring the contingent role of employee proactive personality, this study shows the boundary condition under which employees are more likely to be motivated by their proactive coworkers.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2018-09-07 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： 自我监控是与人际互动密切相关的人格特质。在群体建立和发展的过程中, 自我监控不仅影响个体的人际交往质量, 同时也作用于群体内部的互动; 并且, 自我监控的作用可能随着群体的发展而发生动态变化。为探究上述设想, 本研究针对32个大学新生寝室进行了一学期的跟踪调查。结果表明, 在个体层面, 个体自我监控水平促进群体成员对该个体的积极情感, 并进而间接促进其在群体中的地位获取(个体地位和友谊网络中心度); 在群体层面, 群体自我监控水平促进群体成员间的凝聚力, 并进而间接促进群体在合作中的绩效表现。此外, 个体自我监控水平对他人积极情感的影响存在时间效应, 具体而言, 其正向效应随着群体发展得到一定程度的增强。本研究揭示了自我监控对于个体和群体发生影响的机理, 对于自我监控理论以及地位等相关领域做出了一定的贡献。
Hits
Hits
Downloads
Comment