According to event system theory (Morgeson et al., 2015), the COVID-19 pandemic and resultant stay-at-home orders are novel, critical, and disruptive events at the environmental level that substantially changed people's work, such as where they work, how they interact with colleagues, and so forth. Although many studies have examined events' impact on features or behaviors, few studies have examined how events impact aggregate emotions and how these effects may unfold over time. Applying a state-of-the-art deep learning technique (i.e., fine-tuned BERT algorithm), the current study extracted the public's daily emotion associated with working from home (WFH) at the U.S. state-level over four months (March 01, 2020-July 01, 2020) from 1.56 million Tweets. We then applied discontinuous growth modeling (DGM) to investigate how COVID-19 and resultant stay-at-home orders changed the trajectories of the public's emotions associated with WFH. Our results indicated that stay-at-home orders demonstrated both immediate (i.e., intercept change) and longitudinal (i.e., slope change) effects on the public's emotion trajectories. Daily new COVID-19 case counts did not significantly change the emotion trajectories. We discuss theoretical implications for testing event system theory with the global pandemic and practical implications. We also make Python and R codes for fine-tuning BERT models and DGM analyses open-source so that future researchers can verify our findings or adapt and apply the codes in their own studies.
In this article, we review recent psychometric practices to determine how item response theory (IRT) has been used in organizational research. We identified and coded 63 articles that used IRT on empirical data published in industrial-organizational and organizational behavior journals since 2000. Results show that typical usage for IRT conforms to best practices in several ways; however, in other ways, such as testing for and reporting model fit, there is still significant room for improvement. Next, we surveyed academic and practitioner members of the Society for Industrial-Organizational Psychology (SIOP) on their experiences and attitudes toward IRT. We conclude that IRT is one area where practice outpaces science. There is a cadre of practitioners that consider IRT essential to their professional life. For others, however, IRT is seen as less relevant. Based on our coding analyses and survey results, we provide suggestions on how to better incorporate IRT into organizational research and practice.
This study evaluated how both Caucasians and Asian Americans characterize successful managers and how this compares to general perceptions of Asian American and Caucasian managers. Ninety-three Asian Americans and 94 Caucasians provided their perceptions of 1 of 3 different manager types (Asian American, Caucasian, or successful) and comparisons were explored using models of effective leadership (i.e., transformational and authentic leadership) and Asian stereotypes. Results showed that for Caucasian respondents, a higher degree of resemblance was found between their descriptions of Caucasian managers and successful managers than between their descriptions of Asian American managers and successful managers. Specifically, Caucasians perceived Asian American managers as equally competent, yet less sociable, less transformational, and less authentic than Caucasians. Asian Americans also endorsed the antisocial stereotype of Asian American managers. In addition, Asian American respondents perceived Caucasian managers as less authentic leaders. The discussion explored the complex experiences of the Asian American minority group and the enduring need to foster understanding of ethnic differences in the workplace.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.