Current research shows that geo-political units (e.g., the 50 U.S. states) vary meaningfully on psychological dimensions like intelligence (IQ) and neuroticism (N). A new scientific discipline has also emerged, differential epidemiology, focused on how psychological variables affect health. We integrate these areas by reporting large correlations between aggregate-level IQ and N (measured for the 50 U.S. states) and state differences in rates of chronic disease (e.g., stroke, heart disease). Controlling for health-related behaviors (e.g., smoking, exercise) reduced but did not eliminate these effects. Strong relationships also existed between IQ, N, disease, and a host of other state-level variables (e.g., income, crime, education). The nexus of inter-correlated state variables could reflect a general fitness factor hypothesized by cognitive epidemiologists, although valid inferences about causality will require more research.
We hypothesize the existence of a "somebody else's problem" in management education for the subdiscipline of organizational behavior (OB). The problem regards human intelligence, specifically, the general factor, g. Although g is arguably the most powerful variable in social science, OB educators largely ignore it. To demonstrate the former, we review a vast literature establishing g's construct validity. To demonstrate the latter, we show that current OB textbooks place far less emphasis on g relative to a popular but less potent predictor of organizational success, emotional intelligence. We also show that when textbooks do reference g, it is often just to offer criticism. Misconceptions about empirical data on intelligence testing, denial that a general factor of intelligence exists, the reality of mean racial differences in mental ability, and the finding that genes play a non-trivial role in causing intelligence, seem to make OB's treatment of this topic "somebody else's problem."
The current state of sustainability reporting lacks useful information for decision-making. Specifically, this paper examines the sustainability report of a major multinational organization from the perspective of accounting and the qualities of information as defined by the U.S. Financial Accounting Standards Board and the Global Reporting Initiative. Fifty-eight graduate accounting students were assigned an exercise that involved analyzing Wal-Mart's 2013 Corporate Social Responsibility report within the context of the GRI's Principles of Quality Reporting. The results indicated that the Report failed to provide useful information for stakeholders and was more of an instrument of public relations. While the Report failed to meet many of the GRI's Principles, the students believed the most serious flaw was the absence of cost and segment information. Without mandates the only viable mechanism to improve sustainability reports is for GRI to certify those reports that strictly adhere to the Principles of Quality Reporting.
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.