In the authors' 2-dimensional model of prejudice, explicit and implicit attitudes are used to create 4 profiles: truly low prejudiced (TLP: double lows), aversive racists (AR: low explicit modern racism/high implicit prejudice), principled conservatives (PC: high explicit modern racism/low implicit prejudice), and modern racists (MR: double highs). Students completed an Asian Modern Racism Scale and an Asian/White Implicit Association Test. The authors compared the 4 groups' prejudice-related ideologies (i.e., egalitarianism/humanism and social conservatism) and economic/political conservatism (Study 1, N=132). The authors also tested whether MR but not PC (Study 2, N=65) and AR but not TLP (Study 3, N=143) are more likely to negatively evaluate an Asian target when attributional ambiguity is high (vs. low). In support of the model, TLP did not hold prejudice-related ideologies and did not discriminate; AR were low in conservatism and demonstrated the attributional-ambiguity effect; PC did not strongly endorse prejudice-related ideologies and did not discriminate; MR strongly endorsed prejudice-related ideologies, were conservative, and demonstrated the attributional-ambiguity effect. The authors discuss implications for operationalizing and understanding the nature of prejudice.

This study examines the interactive relationship between job complexity and job autonomy on job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and psychological well-being. It was hypothesized that the positive or motivating effects of job complexity are only realized when workers are given enough autonomy to effectively meet the challenges of complex jobs. Results show that not only do job complexity and job autonomy interact, but that the relationships to the outcome variables are curvilinear in form. Job complexity is shown to be both a motivator and a stressor when job autonomy is low. However, the most beneficial effects of job complexity occur when it is matched by a high level of job autonomy. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to examine how various types of workplace social support from different support sources interact with occupational stressors to predict the psychological wellbeing of university professors. Design/method/approach -A total of 99 full-time professors participated via an online or paper questionnaire. Findings -Using moderated hierarchical multiple regressions, the results support the hypotheses that the effects of occupational stressors on professors' psychological well-being vary depending on the level of perceived workplace social support. However, although workplace social support buffered the effects of some occupational stressors (i.e. work overload), social support exacerbated the adverse effects of others (i.e. decision-making ambiguity).Research limitations/implications -The dichotomous effects of social support suggest that the impact of social support may be moderated by another variable, such as perceived control over the stressor at hand. The present findings echo calls for further refinements to models of social support to examine how individuals' situational appraisals shape the variable interactive effects of stressors and social support on individuals' health and well-being. Originality/value -This study provides new insight into academic work stress by systematically examining the effects of workplace social support on professors' work stress experience. This study also extends our current understanding of the relationships among stressors, strains, and social support by providing empirical evidence that workplace social support is neither consistently beneficial nor a unidimensional construct.

The literature investigating the bias of cognitive ability tests (CATs) is often conflated with the controversy surrounding which method for determining test bias is superior. The general acceptance of the Cleary (1968) model of test bias in industrial/organizational psychology has served to deter evaluations of tests against other models of test bias because acceptance of the Cleary model as ‘superior’ implies the limited relevance of investigations of tests against other models of bias. Although these other models are not considered to be models of predictive bias in the psychometric sense, they nonetheless have significant implications for workplace diversity. Most notably, the existing literature lacks the precision and depth necessary to extrapolate the actual false‐rejection rate in selection decisions that burden visible minority groups when CATs are used. The current study identifies these gaps in the literature in addition to evaluating CATs against the Thorndike (1971) model of test bias. Results indicate that a one standard deviation (SD) difference in Black‐White CAT scores is associated with a Black‐White difference in job performance of approximately 1/3 SD. The Black‐White difference in job performance is reduced to approximately 1/10 SD when objective, rather than subjective, job performance criteria are used. We therefore conclude that CATs are biased against Blacks when evaluated using the Thorndike model. The implications for use of CATs in personnel selection are discussed.

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to examine the interactive effect of interpersonal conflict at work and adopting an integrating/compromising conflict style on workers' psychosocial wellbeing. Design/methodology/approach -A total of 311 employed young adults completed an online questionnaire. Findings -Moderated hierarchical multiple regression analyses support the hypothesis that integrating/compromising interacts with interpersonal conflict at work to predict psychosocial strain. Specifically, it was found that integrating/compromising is related to psychosocial strain in a U-shaped fashion when work conflict is high. Although a moderate degree of integrating/compromising is psychosocially beneficial for workers and can buffer the negative impact of work conflict, beyond a certain point, integrating/compromising is associated with an increase in psychosocial strain when work conflict is high.Research limitations/implications -The results of the study suggest that investigations of conflict styles should focus not only on managing the occurrence of conflict -or resolving it when it does occur -but also on the psychosocial costs of adopting particular conflict styles. The data are cross-sectional; therefore, inferences about causality are limited. Originality/value -The study is one of the few to empirically test the psychosocial costs of adopting particular conflict styles. In addition, compared with similar studies, more complex relationships (i.e. nonlinear) between the variables are assessed.