Two studies tested whether method variance is present at multiple levels of analysis and whether methodological procedures can minimize its impact. In Study 1, 8,052 employees from 71 hotels completed measures of climate, work environment characteristics, and satisfaction. A comparison of correlations at the individual level, cross-level, cross-level split, aggregate level, and aggregate-split level of analysis revealed that response bias was present across multiple levels. Results suggest that samples should be split in half when cross-level and aggregate correlations are computed to ameliorate response bias problems that arise from individual-level method variance. In Study 2, results indicated that the temporal spacing of measures of climate and satisfaction influenced response bias. Implications and recommendations for future research are discussed.
There has been increasing emphasis on professionalism in medical education over the past several decades, initially focusing on bioethical principles, communication skills, and behaviors of medical students and practitioners. Authors have begun to discuss professional identity formation (PIF), distinguishing it as the foundational process one experiences during the transformation from lay person to physician. This integrative developmental process involves the establishment of core values, moral principles, and self-awareness. The literature has approached PIF from various paradigms-professionalism, psychological ego development, social interactions, and various learning theories. Similarities have been identified between the formation process of clergy and that of physicians. PIF reflects a very complex process, or series of processes, best understood by applying aspects of overlapping domains: professionalism, psychosocial identity development, and formation. In this study, the authors review essential elements of these three domains, identify features relevant to medical PIF, and describe strategies reported in the medical education literature that may influence PIF.
This crowdsourced project introduces a collaborative approach to improving the reproducibility of scientific research, in which findings are replicated in qualified independent laboratories before (rather than after) they are published. Our goal is to establish a non-adversarial replication process with highly informative final results. To illustrate the Pre-Publication Independent Replication (PPIR) approach, 25 research groups conducted replications of all ten moral judgment effects which the last author and his collaborators had "in the pipeline" as of August 2014. Six findings replicated according to all replication criteria, one finding replicated but with a significantly smaller effect size than the original, one finding replicated consistently in the original culture but not outside of it, and two findings failed to find support. In total, 40% of the original findings failed at least one major replication criterion. Potential ways to implement and incentivize pre-publication independent replication on a large scale are discussed
We develop a theory of team adaptation that centers on team knowledge structures and coordination processes. Specifically, we explain that when a team’s task changes, there may be a disruption in the extent to which their team mental model (TMM) fits the current situation. Whether this is the case is likely to depend on team compositional factors, emergent states, and structural characteristics of the team. When there is a lack of correspondence between the TMM and the situation, this then requires a shift in the extent to which the team uses implicit or explicit coordination processes. We also explain that the team performance phase matters, such that during action phases, a prevalence of implicit coordination relative to explicit coordination results in greater effectiveness; during a transition phase, the opposite is likely. In this way, we address central questions in the field: what types of task changes require team adaptive response, what happens during the adaptation process, and how this influences team effectiveness over time.
Summary
Although research has established that it is often difficult for individuals engaged in dirty work to adjust to stigma and the attributes giving rise to stigma, little theory or empirical work addresses how managers may help workers adjust to dirty work. Interviews with managers across 18 dirty work occupations—physically tainted (e.g., animal control), socially tainted (e.g., corrections), and morally tainted (e.g., exotic entertainment)—indicate that managers engage in “congruence work”: behaviors, sensemaking, and sensegiving that they perceive as helping individuals adjust and develop a stronger sense of person–environment fit. Specifically, congruence work focuses on 3 phases of managerial practices that correspond to individuals' growing experience in the occupation. First, recruitment/selection involves overcoming individuals' aversion to dirty work by selecting individuals with an affinity for the work and providing a realistic stigma preview. Second, socialization involves helping newcomers adjust to distasteful tasks and to stigma by using targeted divestiture, developing perspective taking, helping newcomers manage external relationships, and utilizing desensitization or immersion. Third, ongoing management roles involve cementing individuals' fit by fostering social validation, protecting workers from dirty work hazards, and negotiating the frontstage/backstage boundary. The practices identified as congruence work highlight the important role that managers can play in facilitating adjustment for both “dirty workers” and presumably their less stigmatized counterparts.
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.