Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

  • Step by step: Sub-goals as a source of motivation
    Publication date: July 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 141

    Author(s): Szu-chi Huang, Liyin Jin, Ying Zhang

    The present research explores the shifting impact of sub-goals on human motivation as individuals move closer to goal attainment, and attributes this shift to the changing source of motivation at different time points during the goal pursuit. In four lab and field experiments, we employed contexts such as exercising, business reviews, and work-for-pay jobs, and performed both within-subject and between-subject tests. We found that when individuals are initiating a goal and derive motivation primarily from the belief that the final goal state is attainable, the structure of sub-goals enhances the sense of attainability and therefore leads to greater motivation. Conversely, when people are completing a goal and the source of motivation centers primarily on the perception that their actions are of value, a focus on the overall goal (rather than sub-goals) heightens the perceived value of the goal-directed actions and leads to greater motivation.





  • “I can’t pay more” versus “It’s not worth more”: Divergent effects of constraint and disparagement rationales in negotiations
    Publication date: July 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 141

    Author(s): Alice J. Lee, Daniel R. Ames

    Past research paints a mixed picture of rationales in negotiations: Some findings suggest rationales might help, whereas others suggest they may have little effect or backfire. Here, we distinguish between two kinds of rationales buyers commonly employ – constraint rationales (referring to one’s own limited resources) and disparagement rationales (involving critiques of the negotiated object) – and demonstrate their divergent effects. Across four studies, we examined spontaneous rationales and manipulated rationale content, finding that constraint rationales have more positive effects on instrumental (e.g., counteroffers) and relational (e.g., trust) outcomes than disparagement rationales. Mediation analyses suggest constraint, but not disparagement, rationales are taken by sellers as signaling a buyer’s limit. We also demonstrate a role for information, showing that the divergence between these rationales’ effects is attenuated when the seller has little information about their object’s value. Overall, our results show how and why rationales can help or hurt negotiators.





  • Fast-and-frugal trees as noncompensatory models of performance-based personnel decisions
    Publication date: July 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 141

    Author(s): Shenghua Luan, Jochen Reb

    Employees’ performance provides the basis for many personnel decisions, and to make these decisions, managers often need to integrate information from different performance-related cues. We asked college students and experienced managers to make a series of performance-based personnel decisions and tested how well weighting-and-adding, compensatory logistic regression and lexicographic, noncompensatory fast-and-frugal trees (FFTs) could describe participants’ decision processes regarding both choices and reaction times. Results show that a significant proportion of the participants (i.e., nearly half of the college students and more than two-thirds of the experienced managers) applied FFTs to make such decisions, and that the majority of them adopted key features of FFTs adaptively in response to a manipulation of the required distributions of positive (bonus) or negative (termination) decisions. Overall, the process-oriented approach applied in our study provides insights on not only what cues managers use for performance-based personnel decisions, but also how they use these cues.





  • Using pre-test explanations to improve test-taker reactions: Testing a set of “wise” interventions
    Publication date: July 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 141

    Author(s): Julie M. McCarthy, Talya N. Bauer, Donald M. Truxillo, Michael C. Campion, Chad H. Van Iddekinge, Michael A. Campion

    The present research tested a set of “wise” interventions (Walton, 2014) designed to improve employee reactions to assessment tests. Drawing upon theories of test-taking reactions, fairness, and social exchange, we generated and pilot-tested pre-test explanations to facilitate positive reactions to the assessments. Across two experimental studies of working adults, we tested a control condition and four experimental groups: (1) an informational fairness condition, (2) a social fairness condition, (3) an uncertainty reduction condition, and (4) a combined condition. In the first study, 256 retail employees were randomly assigned to one of the pre-test explanation conditions before completing a work sample test. Findings indicated higher perceptions of fairness for test-takers in the combined explanation group. In addition, the effects of the test explanations depended upon two contextual variables: test-takers’ level of perceived organizational support and the quality of leader-member exchange relationships with their supervisors. In the second study, the mechanisms underlying pre-test explanations were examined using an online sample of 269 working adults. Consistent with our conceptual framework, findings demonstrated that pre-test explanations had direct effects on transparency, respect, and reassurance. Taken together, these findings have implications for understanding the effects of pre-test explanations in organizational settings as well as the boundary conditions for their use.





  • Lack of sleep and the development of leader-follower relationships over time
    Publication date: July 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 141

    Author(s): Cristiano L. Guarana, Christopher M. Barnes

    Drawing from the sleep and emotion regulation model, and attribution theory, we argue that sleep can influence the quality of the relationship between leaders and their followers. Specifically, we examined the effects of lack of sleep on leader-follower relationship development at the beginning of their dyad tenure. We hypothesized that the negative effects of lack of sleep on relationships are mediated by hostility. Results based on 86 new dyads (first three days of their work relationship) showed support for our hypotheses (Study 1). Results based on 40 leaders and 120 followers over three months (five waves) also showed that lack of sleep influences perceptions of relationship quality via hostility for both leaders and followers (Study 2). Moreover, we found that the direct effects of follower lack of sleep affect leader perceptions of relationship quality in the first month of their dyad tenure but decreasingly so over time; the direct effects of a leader lack of sleep on follower perceptions of relationship quality did not vary based on dyad tenure. Results revealed that individuals are not aware of the impact of their own lack of sleep on other people’s perceptions of relationship quality, suggesting that leaders and followers may be damaging their relationship without realizing it.





  • Groups outperform individuals in tacit coordination by using consensual and disjunctive salience
    Publication date: July 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 141

    Author(s): Christopher R. Chartier, Susanne Abele

    Tacit coordination between individuals has received considerable research attention (Mehta, Starmer, & Sugden, 1994; Abele & Stasser, 2008). However, groups often must coordinate tacitly with other groups, and such intergroup coordination has been rarely studied. In three experiments, we found that interacting groups are more successful at coordinating tacitly than are individuals. This advantage is driven by two types of coordination salience that are uniquely derived from groups deliberating and making collective responses. Consensual salience occurs when groups select a response because a majority of members support it. Majorities efficiently identify popular response tendencies (i.e., focal points) and thereby increase the chances of matching other groups’ responses. Disjunctive salience occurs when at least one member of a group suggests a focal point. We propose that focal points are often demonstratively evident when mentioned, and if proposed by any group member, are likely to be adopted as the group response.





  • Cover 2 – Editorial Board/Barcode
    Publication date: May 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 140









  • Disloyalty aversion: Greater reluctance to bet against close others than the self
    Publication date: May 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 140

    Author(s): Simone Tang, Carey M. Morewedge, Richard P. Larrick, Jill G. Klein

    We examine the mechanisms by which loyalty can induce risk seeking. In seven studies, participants exhibited disloyalty aversion—they were more reluctant to bet on the failure of a close other than on their own failure. In contrast, participants were just as willing to bet on the failure of strangers as on their own failure. This effect persisted when bets were made in private, payouts were larger for betting on failure than success (Studies 1–4, 6), and failure was most likely (Studies 2–6). We propose that disloyalty aversion occurs because the negative identity signal to the self that hedging creates can outweigh the rewards conferred by hedging. Indeed, disloyalty aversion was moderated by factors affecting the strength of this self-signal and the payout of the hedge, including the closeness of the other person, bettors’ trait loyalty, and payout magnitude (Studies 3–5). Disloyalty aversion strongly influences social preferences involving risk.





http://rss.sciencedirect.com/publication/science/07495978

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Email
Facebook
Facebook
YouTube
YouTube
Pin It