Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Language
Publication year range
1.
Psychol Bull ; 144(2): 198-222, 2018 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29239629

ABSTRACT

Gender differences in the initiation of negotiation have been suggested to reinforce unequal distributions of resources between men and women. Because previous research had yielded heterogeneous results, the authors conducted a meta-analysis investigating gender differences in initiating negotiation. On the basis of social role theory, they hypothesized that women are less likely to initiate negotiations than men, but also that the effect varies depending on characteristics of the immediate negotiation situation and the wider societal context. The meta-analysis comprised 55 effect sizes with 17,504 individuals, including both students and employees. A random-effects model confirmed that women were indeed less likely to initiate negotiations than men (g = 0.20). Additional moderator analyses, tested with mixed-effects models and metaregressions, revealed that gender differences were smaller when situational ambiguity regarding the appropriateness of negotiating was low rather than high as well as when situational cues were more consistent with the female gender role than with the male gender role. Gender differences decreased by year of publication (from 1977 to 2016) but were unrelated to the degree of gender inequality in the countries in which the studies were conducted. The authors conclude that gender differences in the initiation of negotiation exist, but they are small and context-bound. Finally, they discuss mechanisms that alter the gender difference with a particular focus on potential starting points for practical interventions. (PsycINFO Database Record


Subject(s)
Gender Identity , Negotiating , Sex Factors , Adult , Female , Humans , Male
2.
PLoS One ; 8(12): e81558, 2013.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24358115

ABSTRACT

Contrary to predictions from Expected Utility Theory and Game Theory, when making economic decisions in interpersonal situations, people take the interest of others into account and express various forms of solidarity, even in one-shot interactions with anonymous strangers. Research in other-regarding behavior is dominated by behavioral economical and evolutionary biological approaches. Psychological theory building, which addresses mental processes underlying other-regarding behavior, is rare. Based on Relational Models Theory (RMT, [1]) and Relationship Regulation Theory (RRT, [2]) it is proposed that moral motives influence individuals' decision behavior in interpersonal situations via conscious and unconscious (automatic) processes. To test our propositions we developed the 'Dyadic Solidarity Game' and its solitary equivalent, the 'Self-Insurance Game'. Four experiments, in which the moral motives "Unity" and "Proportionality" were manipulated, support the propositions made. First, it was shown that consciously activated moral motives (via framing of the overall goal of the experiment) and unconsciously activated moral motives (via subliminal priming) influence other-regarding behavior. Second, this influence was only found in interpersonal, not in solitary situations. Third, by combining the analyses of the two experimental games the extent to which participants apply the Golden Rule ("treat others how you wish to be treated") could be established. Individuals with a "Unity" motive treated others like themselves, whereas individuals with a "Proportionality" motive gave others less then they gave themselves. The four experiments not only support the assumption that morals matter in economic games, they also deliver new insights in how morals matter in economic decision making.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Game Theory , Morals , Motivation , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Psychological Theory , Young Adult
3.
Univ. psychol ; 10(3): 657-668, sep. 2011. tab
Article in English | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: lil-650097

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to clarify the validity of the short scale of Transformational Leadership used by the Human System Audit (short HSA-TFL). The need of today's enterprises for combined assessment of transformational leadership and quality-related performance in wider contexts requires short instruments based on scientific research. Convergent, construct and criterion validity of the short HSA-TFL were analyzed. Comparison of the short HSA-TFL with the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ-5X) showed high convergent validity. Exploratory factor analysis with hospital workers in Spain (N = 625) showed the single factor structure of the Spanish version of the HSA-TFL. Confirmatory factor analysis using three further samples of hospital workers (N = 776) from different european countries confirmed a single factor. As regards criterion validity, the results indicated that the short HSA-TFL is positively related in all four countries to subjective performance. In sum, the results provide empirical evidence for the validity of the short HSA-TFL scale.


La necesidad de las empresas de evaluar el liderazgo transformacional en un contexto amplio y combinado con rendimiento de calidad, requiere instrumentos cortos y, al mismo tiempo, basados en evidencia científica. El objetivo de este estudio fue analizar la validez (convergente, de constructo y de criterio) de la escala corta del Liderazgo Transformacional, usada por la Auditoria del Sistema Humano (short HSA-TFL). La comparación con el Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ-5X) aportó valores de alta validez convergente. El análisis factorial exploratorio con empleados del sector sanitario en España (N = 625) del HSA-TFL, sugiere una estructura unifactorial, que fue confirmada mediante análisis factorial confirmatorio, realizado con otras tres muestras de empleados del sector hospitalario de varios países europeos (N = 776). Asimismo, los resultados muestran, en los cuatro países, una relación positiva del HSA-TFL con el rendimiento subjetivo (validez de criterio). En conclusión, la versión breve del HSA-TFL es válida para el análisis del liderazgo transformacional.

4.
J Pers Soc Psychol ; 91(6): 1080-93, 2006 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17144766

ABSTRACT

The effect of diversity in individual prediscussion preferences on group decision quality was examined in an experiment in which 135 three-person groups worked on a personnel selection case with 4 alternatives. The information distribution among group members constituted a hidden profile (i.e., the correct solution was not identifiable on the basis of the members' individual information and could be detected only by pooling and integrating the members' unique information). Whereas groups with homogeneous suboptimal prediscussion preferences (no dissent) hardly ever solved the hidden profile, solution rates were significantly higher in groups with prediscussion dissent, even if none of these individual prediscussion preferences were correct. If dissent came from a proponent of the correct solution, solution rates were even higher than in dissent groups without such a proponent. The magnitude of dissent (i.e., minority dissent or full diversity of individual preferences) did not affect decision quality. The beneficial effect of dissent on group decision quality was mediated primarily by greater discussion intensity and to some extent also by less discussion bias in dissent groups.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Dissent and Disputes , Group Processes , Problem Solving , Adult , Choice Behavior , Female , Group Structure , Humans , Individuality , Male
5.
J Exp Psychol Appl ; 12(1): 31-42, 2006 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16536657

ABSTRACT

Group discussions tend to focus on information that was previously known by all members (shared information) rather than information known by only 1 member (unshared information). If the shared information implies a suboptimal alternative, this sampling bias is associated with inaccurate group decisions. The present study examines the impact of 2 factors on information exchange and decision quality: (a) an advocacy group decision procedure versus unstructured discussion and (b) task experience. Results show that advocacy groups discussed both more shared and unshared information than free-discussion groups. Further, with increasing experience, more unshared information was mentioned in advocacy groups. In contrast, there was no such increase in unstructured discussions. Yet advocacy groups did not significantly improve their decision quality with experience.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Disclosure , Group Processes , Adult , Female , Humans , Male
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...