A meta-analysis of 117 studies evaluated the effects of behavior modeling training (BMT) on 6 training outcomes, across characteristics of training design. BMT effects were largest for learning outcomes, smaller for job behavior, and smaller still for results outcomes. Although BMT effects on declarative knowledge decayed over time, training effects on skills and job behavior remained stable or even increased. Skill development was greatest when learning points were used and presented as rule codes and when training time was longest. Transfer was greatest when mixed (negative and positive) models were presented, when practice included trainee-generated scenarios, when trainees were instructed to set goals, when trainees' superiors were also trained, and when rewards and sanctions were instituted in trainees' work environments.

Cartwright, 2004), which incorporates individual work stressors, stress outcomes (physical and psychological wellbeing), and commitment (both to and from an organization). Psychological well-being, commitment from the organization to the employee, and resources were found to be predictive. Physical health, individual work stressors (with the exception of resources), and commitment from the employee to the organization were not identified as important. The findings are discussed with reference to both previous and future research. The large sample size and broad range of occupations included suggest the findings are generalizable to other employee groupings. Implications for both stress and management theory are discussed.

Criterion-related validities and inter-rater reliabilities for structured employment interview studies using situational questions (e.g. ''Assume that you were faced with the following situation . . . what would you do?'') were compared meta-analytically with studies using past behaviour questions (e.g. ''Can you think of a time when . . . what did you do?''). Validities and reliabilities were further analysed in terms of whether descriptively-anchored rating scales were used to judge interviewees' answers, and validities for each question type were also assessed across three levels of job complexity.While both question formats yielded high validity estimates, studies using past behaviour questions, when used with discriptively anchored answer rating scales, yielded a substantially higher mean validity estimate than studies using the situational question format with descriptively-anchored answer rating scales (.63 versus .47). Question type (situational versus past behaviour) was found to moderate interview validity, after controlling for whether studies used answer rating scales. No support was found for the hypothesis that situational questions are less valid for predicting job performance in high-complexity jobs.Sample-weighted mean inter-rater reliabilities were similar for both situational and past behaviour questions, provided that descriptively-anchored rating scales were used (.79 and .77, respectively), although they were slightly lower (.73) for past behaviour question studies lacking such rating scales.

One hundred seven management training evaluations were meta-analyzed to compare effect sizes for the transfer of managerial training derived from different rating sources (self, superior, peer, and subordinate) and broken down by both study- and training-related variables. For studies as a whole, and interpersonal management skills training studies in particular, transfer effects based on trainees' self-ratings, and to a lesser extent ratings from their superiors, were largest and most varied across studies. In contrast, transfer effects based on peer ratings, and particularly subordinate ratings, were substantially smaller and more homogeneous. This pattern was consistent across different sources of studies, features of evaluation design, and within a subset of 14 studies that each included all 4 rating sources. Across most rating sources, transfer of training was greatest for studies conducted in nonmilitary settings, when raters were likely to have known whether the manager being rated had attended training, when criteria were targeted to training content, when training content was derived from an analysis of tasks and skill requirements, and when training included opportunities for practice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved).

This research examined the relationship between Linguistic Style Matching-the degree to which negotiators coordinate their word use-and negotiation outcome. Nine hostage negotiations were divided into 6 time stages and the dialogue of police negotiators and hostage takers analyzed across 18 linguistic categories. Correlational analyses showed that successful negotiations were associated with higher aggregate levels of Linguistic Style Matching (LSM) than unsuccessful negotiations. This result was due to dramatic fluctuations of LSM during unsuccessful negotiations, with negotiators unable to maintain the constant levels of rapport and coordination that occurred in successful negotiations. A further analysis of LSM at the local turn-by-turn level revealed complex but organized variations in behavior across outcome. In comparison to unsuccessful negotiations, the dialogue of successful negotiations involved greater coordination of turn taking, reciprocation of positive affect, a focus on the present rather than the past, and a focus on alternatives rather than on competition. Linguistic Style Matching 3 Linguistic Style Matching and Negotiation OutcomeConflict researchers have long been interested in uncovering the communicative dynamics that determine whether or not a negotiation is successful. This interest has particular prominence in crisis negotiation research, where outcome has been shown to relate to differences in relational dynamics (Donohue & Roberto, 1993), behavioral competitiveness (Taylor, 2002a), the reciprocation of offers and arguments (Giebels & Taylor, in press), and many other facets of the interpersonal process. However, to date, research in crisis negotiation has given almost no consideration to the importance of language use. This oversight is significant, not least because the words and phrases that speakers use to negotiate a crisis represent the channel through which instrumental and relational dynamics are played out. Understanding how language use shapes the development of a negotiation is therefore likely to provide significant insights into the interpersonal dynamics of conflict. This paper focuses on one aspect of language use known as linguistic style matching, and considers its role in determining how crisis negotiations unfold and resolve. Linguistic Style Matching (LSM)When two people interact, their utterances are patterned and coordinated, with each individual's cues and responses fitting into a sequence of interconnected events (Auld & White, 1959;Putnam, 1985). In the nonverbal literature, this coordination of actions is considered essential to interaction success. Facial expressions, non-verbal behaviors, kinetics and proxemics have each been shown to coordinate in systematic and organized ways to enhance the communication process (Ellis & Beattie, 1986 Accommodation Theory (Giles & Coupland, 1991), individuals continually adapt their communication behavior to create, maintain or decrease the social distance between themselves and the other party. One strategy that...

A longitudinal evaluation was conducted on the effects of introducing a performance management system (PMS), which featured merit-based bonus pay, on subsequent employee attitudes and self-reported work effort in a small, government organiza tion. Additionally, employees' targets of blame for receiving lower-than-expected ratings were explored. A significant change in employees' organizational commit ment occurred over the time that the PMS was implemented, with a substantial increase occurring within the performance planning/goal-setting phase, followed by a slight decay over the following year, but still ending higher than the pre-PMS base line level. Substantial increases in ratings of satisfaction and cooperation with one's supervisor were found with the introduction of the PMS for low performers (particu larly following the performance planning/goal-setting phase). In contrast, however, high performers had high base-line levels of these attitudes toward supervision, followed by substantial drops immediately after receiving appraisal and bonus pay distributions. As anticipated, most participants in this study had expected a perfor mance rating higher than they actually received, and most of these individuals made external attributions for the rating discrepancy, blaming either their supervisor, the organization, or the PMS itself. However, neither having received a lower-thanexpected appraisal rating nor having made external attributions for a lower-thanexpected rating were related to changes in attitudes or self-reported effort.Compensation surveys in the United States have consistently reported that pay-for-performance systems are used in the vast majority of private firms.i'2,3,4,5 While the prevalence of pay-for-performance in public organizations is considerably less, public sector use of these systems has been on the increase.^ From a measurement perspective, a pay-for-performance system, which relies exclusively on objective indices of performance, would be prefer able. However, for many (particularly white-collar) jobs, at least some aspects of performance cannot be adequately captured with only objec tive measures, and so the most commonly used individually-based system to link pay with performance appears to be merit pay,''-« a system which relies on subjective appraisal ratings, typically made by one's manager.Merit pay is frequently implemented for professional and managerial jobs as a component of a larger performance management system (PMS), which typically involves the following cyclic activities. First, employee and supervisor first agree on key result areas (or broad accountabilities) for the employee's job. Then, on a regular basis (typi cally a yearly cycle), they jointly set results-type objectives for the employee within those key result areas, and identify how progress toward achievement of those objectives will be measured. During the PMS cycle, the employee and manager track performance against objec tives, with the manager providing support and coaching as necessary. At the completion...

Although a range of methods allow investigators to measure the local dependencies among behaviors in a sequence, only indirect methods are available for measuring the interrelationships among behaviors across an entire sequence. This article introduces a new "proximity" coefficient that measures interrelationships among behaviors as a direct function of their intrinsic organization within a sequence. The coefficient does not depend on a user-defined "window" of analysis and provides an efficient use of data that facilitates comparisons across actors, over time periods, and between single cases. An analysis of artificial data shows further properties of the coefficient, including a diagonal value that reflects the degree to which a behavior is reciprocated, and an asymmetry in values that depicts the relative precedence among behaviors. Extensions of the coefficient to the multivariate case, and its relation to existing methods of analyzing sequences, are discussed.

No abstract