Humility at Work

Davis, Don E.; Hook, Joshua N.; DeBlaere, Cirleen; Placeres, Vanessa

doi:10.1002/9781118977620.ch12

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We can also derive indirect evidence for the span hypothesis through examining the relationship between humility and several constructs that show robust and positive correlations with religious fundamentalism, which some scholars might view as antithetical to a stance of intellectual humility. Along these lines, humility has been robustly and negatively correlated with social dominance, which is a preference for hierarchical rather than egalitarian relationships (for a review, see Davis et al, in press). However, a related finding that is not fully understood is the relationship between humility and right-winged authoritarianism (defined as a preference for conformance to traditional authority structures).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Humility, religion, and spirituality: A review of the literature.

Davis

Hook

McAnnally-Linz

et al. 2017

Psychology of Religion and Spirituality

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of positive psychology provides a strong opportunity for interdisciplinary work that integrates theorizing from theology and psychology of religion. The purpose of the current article is to provide a systematic review of empirical work on humility and religion/spirituality. We review definitions and key research questions that have driven work in this area, including work examining whether more religious people tend to be more humble, as well as work examining whether humility helps soften some of the ways that religion can lead to ideological conflict or entrenchment. We discuss key limitations from both a psychological and theological perspective before providing a research program to guide future work.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Humility, religion, and spirituality: A review of the literature.

Davis

Hook

McAnnally-Linz

et al. 2017

Psychology of Religion and Spirituality

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As noted in the introduction, studies have shown that this has many benefits for individuals, teams and organizations -higher work engagement and job satisfaction, enhanced creativity, increased team performance, lower turnover, higher firm performance, etc. (Davis et al, 2016;Ou et al, 2018;Owens et al, 2013;Swain & Murray, 2020). In addition, AOT managers tended to have teams that are more psychologically safe which also has its own benefits such as heightened job performance, engagement and creativity, enhanced team learning and reduction in errors (Newman et al, 2017;Edmondson & Lei, 2014;Frazier et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…increased team performance, enhanced information sharing) and organizational level (e.g. lower turnover, higher firm performance; Davis et al, 2016;Ou et al, 2018;Owens et al, 2013;Swain & Murray, 2020).…”

Section: Possible Beneficial Effects Of Actively Open-minded Thinking...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Decision-making skills and styles as predictors of managerial performance

Erceg¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this multi-paper dissertation (i.e. Scandinavian model PhD thesis) was to address several of the gaps identified in the literature related to the assessment of individual differences in reasoning and decision-making quality, sometimes also referred to as rationality. In first two studies, we tested the construct validity of the cognitive reflection test (CRT) and its nonnumerical counterpart belief-bias syllogisms (BBS; Study 1) and investigated different ways and approaches to solving these tasks (Study 2). We concluded that CRT and another numerical test that does not contain lures are factorially indistinguishable and that lures do not play role in the success on or predictive validity of the CRT or BBS (Study 1). Additionally, we showed that in many cases when CRT and BBS tasks are solved correctly, they are solved relying solely on intuition and not analytical thinking. We conclude that these two tests are therefore not particularly good measure of reflection and analytical thinking engagement as thought before. In Study 3, across two studies, we examined a factorial structure of different cognitive biases tasks in a bid to understand the structure of rationality captured by these tasks and to validate identified rationality factor(s). In both studies, one-factor solution was the most appropriate and, to a large degree, explained by numerical abilities and thinking disposition called actively open-minded thinking (AOT; 61% of the rationality factor variance in Study 1 and 75% in Study 2). We conclude that cognitive biases tasks are highly heterogeneous and not particularly good solution for measuring rationality. Instead, we argue that individual differences in rational judgments and decisions matter are better captured by AOT. In Study 4, across three samples (undergraduates, employed participants and entrepreneurs), we showed that decision-making styles matter for various real-life and work-related outcomes, often adding explanatory power over cognitive abilities and personality traits. Finally, in Study 5, we examined the relevance of managerial AOT for positive organizational and employee-level outcomes. Over two studies, managers’ AOT correlated positively with range of positive personal and organizational outcomes. We concluded that concluded that it would be worthwhile to focus on AOT in selection for leadership positions as well as teach current leaders about the benefits and implementation of this way of thinking. In sum, results of our five studies point to the conclusion that how we think is as important, if not more, for consequential real-life outcomes, than how smart we are. What seem to be the most important is not to avoid decision-making and making them after the process of thinking in an actively open-minded way.

show abstract