Fit to be good: Physical fitness is negatively associated with deviance.

While modern organizations generate economic value, they also produce negative externalities in terms of human physical fitness, such that workers globally are becoming physically unfit. In the current research, we focus on a significant but overlooked indirect cost that lack of physical fitness entails-deviance. In contrast to early (and methodologically limited) research in criminology, which suggests that physically fit people are more likely to behave in a deviant manner, we draw on self-control theory to suggest the opposite: That physically fit people are less likely to engage in deviance. In Study 1, we assembled a dataset on 50 metropolitan areas in the U.S. spanning a 9-year period, and found that physical fitness index of a metropolitan area is negatively related to deviance in that area in a concurrent as well as time-lagged fashion. We complemented this aggregate-level theory test with two studies testing the theory at the individual level. In Study 2, we collected multi-source data from 3,925 military recruits who underwent physical training and found that those who score higher on physical fitness test are less likely to engage in deviance. Study 3 conceptually replicated the effect with both concurrent and time-lagged models using a five-wave longitudinal design in a sample of employees working in service roles, and also found that ego depletion mediates the effect of physical activity on workplace deviance. We speculate on economic implications of the observed relationship between physical fitness and deviance and discuss its relevance for organizations and public policy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Financial vulnerability and the reproduction of disadvantage in economic exchanges.

Integrative value generation through negotiated business deals is a fundamental way in which organizations and economic systems attain economic benefits. It is also an important way in which individuals can improve their financial situation. We propose that individuals most in need of improving their financial standing, those in a financially vulnerable situation, are least likely to reap the benefits of integrative value generation. We theorize that financial vulnerability induces a more zero-sum construal of success, or a view that success for one person must come at another person's success. A more zero-sum construal of success, in turn, hampers negotiators' ability to realize integrative potential in negotiations. In a large archival dataset (N = 191,648), we found evidence that various proxies of financial vulnerability are associated with a more zero-sum construal of success. In two subsequent face-to-face negotiation studies, we found that financial vulnerability, whether measured or induced experimentally, undermined integrative value generation. The final two-part study found evidence of the hypothesized psychological process. Taken together, our studies uncover a fundamental pathway through which the disadvantage of financially vulnerable people is reproduced through economic exchanges. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Resource scarcity, effort, and performance in physically demanding jobs: An evolutionary explanation.

Based on evolutionary theory, we predicted that cues of resource scarcity in the environment (e.g., news of droughts or food shortages) lead people to reduce their effort and performance in physically demanding work. We tested this prediction in a 2-wave field survey among employees and replicated it experimentally in the lab. In Study 1, employees who perceived resources in the environment to be scarce reported exerting less effort when their jobs involved much (but not little) physical work. In Study 2, participants who read that resources in the environment were scarce performed worse on a task demanding more (carrying books) but not less (transcribing book titles) physical work. This result was found even though better performance increased participants' chances of additional remuneration, and even though scarcity cues did not affect individuals' actual ability to meet their energy needs. We discuss implications for managing effort and performance, and the potential of evolutionary psychology to explain core organizational phenomena. (PsycINFO Database Record

Perceived entitlement causes discrimination against attractive job candidates in the domain of relatively less desirable jobs.

People generally hold positive stereotypes of physically attractive people and because of those stereotypes often treat them more favorably. However, we propose that some beliefs about attractive people, specifically, the perception that attractive individuals have a greater sense of entitlement than less attractive individuals, can result in negative treatment of attractive people. We examine this in the context of job selection and propose that for relatively less desirable jobs, attractive candidates will be discriminated against. We argue that the ascribed sense of entitlement to good outcomes leads to perceptions that attractive individuals are more likely to be dissatisfied working in relatively less desirable jobs. When selecting candidates for relatively less desirable jobs, decision makers try to ascertain whether a candidate would be satisfied in those jobs, and the stereotype of attractive individuals feeling entitled to good outcomes makes decision makers judge attractive candidates as more likely to be dissatisfied in relatively less (but not more) desirable jobs. Consequently, attractive candidates are discriminated against in the selection for relatively less desirable jobs. Four experiments found support for this theory. Our results suggest that different discriminatory processes operate when decision makers select among candidates for relatively less desirable jobs and that attractive people might be systematically discriminated against in a segment of the workforce. (PsycINFO Database Record

Unethical for the sake of the group: risk of social exclusion and pro-group unethical behavior.

This research tested the idea that the risk of exclusion from one's group motivates group members to engage in unethical behaviors that secure better outcomes for the group (pro-group unethical behaviors). We theorized that this effect occurs because those at risk of exclusion seek to improve their inclusionary status by engaging in unethical behaviors that benefit the group; we tested this assumption by examining how the effect of exclusion risk on pro-group unethical behavior varies as a function of group members' need for inclusion. A 2-wave field study conducted among a diverse sample of employees working in groups (Study 1) and a constructive replication using a laboratory experiment (Study 2) provided converging evidence for the theory. Study 1 found that perceived risk of exclusion from one's workgroup predicted employees' engagement in pro-group unethical behaviors, but only when employees have a high (not low) need for inclusion. In Study 2, compared to low risk of exclusion from a group, high risk of exclusion led to more pro-group (but not pro-self) unethical behaviors, but only for participants with a high (not low) need for inclusion. We discuss implications for theory and the management of unethical behaviors in organizations.

A lack of material resources causes harsher moral judgments.

In the research presented here, we tested the idea that a lack of material resources (e.g., low income) causes people to make harsher moral judgments because a lack of material resources is associated with a lower ability to cope with the effects of others' harmful behavior. Consistent with this idea, results from a large cross-cultural survey (Study 1) showed that both a chronic (due to low income) and a situational (due to inflation) lack of material resources were associated with harsher moral judgments. The effect of inflation was stronger for low-income individuals, whom inflation renders relatively more vulnerable. In a follow-up experiment (Study 2), we manipulated whether participants perceived themselves as lacking material resources by employing different anchors on the scale they used to report their income. The manipulation led participants in the material-resources-lacking condition to make harsher judgments of harmful, but not of nonharmful, transgressions, and this effect was explained by a sense of vulnerability. Alternative explanations were excluded. These results demonstrate a functional and contextually situated nature of moral psychology.

Masters of the universe: how power and accountability influence self-serving decisions under moral hazard.

This article provides an answer to the question of why agents make self-serving decisions under moral hazard and how their self-serving decisions can be kept in check through institutional arrangements. Our theoretical model predicts that the agents' power and the manner in which they are held accountable jointly determine their propensity to make self-serving decisions. We test our theory in the context of financial investment decisions made under moral hazard using others' funds. Across 3 studies, using different decision-making tasks, different manipulations of power and accountability, and different samples, we show that agents' power makes them more likely to behave in a self-serving manner under moral hazard, but only when the appropriate accountability mechanisms are not in place. Specifically, we distinguish between outcome and procedural accountability and show that holding agents accountable for their decision-making procedure reduces the level of self-serving decisions under moral hazard and also curbs the negative consequences of power. Implications for decisions under moral hazard, the psychology of power, and the accountability literature are discussed.