This research examined the validity of the 2-factor (e.g., Button, Mathieu, and Zajac, 1996) and 3-factor (e.g., VandeWalle, 1997) models of goal orientation. These models differ in specifying the dimensionality, measurement, and nomological network for learning goal orientation and performance goal orientation constructs. This study specifically tested the factorial and nomological validity of each model of goal orientation. The factorial validity was examined through a series of nested models and evaluating model fit parameters. The nomological validity of goal orientation was examined testing theoretically-derived relationships with the self-concept traits (e.g., core self-evaluations) of self-esteem, internal locus of control, generalized self-efficacy, and emotional stability. In addition, goal orientation relationships with need for achievement, fear of negative evaluation, and social desirability were also examined. Results of this study yielded mixed findings for the a priori models. Data from a student sample (N=314) and an employee sample (N=114) resulted in mixed findings across models and across samples. Although there was general support for both factor structures, several psychometric weaknesses were noted in the scales including low factor loadings, low factor variances, and low inter-item correlations. Additionally, results of the test-retest stability of goal orientation constructs were lower than desired across both models. Results of the hypothesized relationships found consistent support for learning goal orientation relationships, while the results for performance goal orientation were mixed. Learning goal orientation reflected positive and moderate levels of associations (i.e., r >.20) with self-esteem, internal locus of control, generalized self-efficacy, emotional stability, need for achievement and negatively related to fear of negative evaluation. Learning goal orientation also reflected positive but smaller levels of association with social desirability. Hypothesized relationships were supported for VandeWalle's (1997) performance avoid goal orientation reflecting negative relationships with the same correlates, except for a positive association with fear of negative evaluation. In general, the hypothesized relationships for Button et al.'s (1996) performance goal orientation and VandeWalle's (1997) performance prove goal orientation were not supported. These relationships resulted in near zero-correlations. Implications for future research addressing the conceptual framework, measurement and nomological relationships for goal orientation are discussed. / Ph. D.

Master of Science / Department of Psychological Sciences / Patrick Knight / The current study examined attributions of blame for workplace errors through the lens of Kelley’s (1967) ANOVA model of attribution-making, which addresses the consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness of a behavior. Consensus and distinctiveness information were manipulated in the description of a workplace accident. It was expected that participants would make different attributions regarding the cause of the event due to these manipulations. This study further attempted to determine if an individual’s core self-evaluations (CSE) impact how she or he evaluates a workplace accident and attributes blame, either from the perspective of the employee who made the error or that of a co-worker. Because CSE are fundamental beliefs about an individual’s success, ability, and self-worth, they may contribute to how the individual attributes blame for a workplace accident. It was found that CSE were positively related to participants’ inclination to make internal attributions of blame for a workplace error. Contrary to expectations, manipulations of the consensus and distinctiveness of the workplace error did not moderate participants’ attributions of blame. Explanations for these findings are discussed, as are possible applications of this research.

This study examines whether eliciting self-evaluations increases or decreases the propensity of a productive agent to retaliate against an employer for paying compensation that the agent perceives to be too low for the work performed. Specifically, I consider a setting in which a principal knows more about the agent’s production than even the agent can observe. In such a setting, an agent might perceive that s/he is being underpaid if the principal pays less than the agent believes s/he deserves, especially if the agent is overconfident about his/her own productive ability. Such an agent could take retaliatory actions against the principal that would be costly to both parties. Self-evaluations could mitigate such tendencies if they result in compensation that is more aligned with agent self-perceptions. Alternatively, self-evaluations could worsen such tendencies if they reinforce the perceived inequity of compensation that does not match agent self-perceptions. I present experimental evidence from comparing a control condition without self-evaluations to three different forms of self-evaluation reports, finding evidence consistent with the premise that self-evaluations increase retaliatory actions and lower welfare. My findings show a cost to self-evaluations that thus far has not been sufficiently considered in the literature. / text

This dissertation examines the relationship between two social psychological theories: Social Comparison Theory (Festinger, 1954) and Construal Level Theory (Liberman & Trope, 1998). More specifically, this research assesses how a person's level of mental abstraction (i.e., construal level) might influence the way social comparison information from individuals or aggregates is used to form self-evaluations. Typically, comparison information from individuals (versus information about aggregates) is given disproportionate weight when forming self-evaluations; in other words, there is a "local" (i.e., individual) dominance effect in the utilization of social comparison information (e.g., Zell & Alicke, 2010). It is predicted that with greater mental abstraction (i.e., higher construal level), this tendency will be reversed, and instead comparison information from aggregates will be relied upon more when evaluating the self. In other words, abstract mindsets (versus concrete mindsets) should result in a "global" (i.e., aggregate) dominance effect in the weighting of social comparison information. Six studies examine the influence of construal level on the use of aggregate versus individual social comparison information. Two pilot studies provide initial evidence that abstract mindsets lead to a global dominance effect. The generalizability of these effects is tested by providing comparison feedback on different tasks (Study 1 and Study 4), testing the influence of different construal mindset manipulations (Study 2), as well as manipulating the psychological distance (an antecedent of construal level; e.g., Trope and Liberman, 2003) of social comparison targets (Studies 3 - 4). Additionally, the relative weighting of individual versus aggregate comparison targets is directly tested by comparing self-evaluations with only aggregate comparison information, and with both aggregate and individual comparison information (Study 2 and Study 4). Results across all studies indicate that while social comparisons with better off or worse off targets typically result in robust effects, evidence of local dominance and effects of construal manipulations are much more subtle. Theoretical implications for Social Comparison Theory and Construal Level Theory and practical implications are discussed.

<p>I en allt mer flexibel och osäker arbetsmarknad, har individers uppfattning av sin anställningsbarhet påverkan på deras hälsa och mentala välbefinnande. Syftet<strong> </strong>med föreliggande studie var att undersöka om core self-evaluations kunde predicera anställningsbarhet, det vill säga individens bedömning av sina egna möjligheter att skaffa ett nytt, likvärdigt arbete. Datainsamlingen bestod av enkäter som besvarades av 406 anställda vid tre olika rikstäckande organisationer i Sverige vid två tillfällen (2005 och 2006). Hierarkisk regressionsanalys utfördes för att studera effekten av core self-evaluations på anställningsbarhet; då kontrollvariablerna kön, ålder samt utbildning, kontrollerades för. Resultatet visade på ett positivt signifikant samband mellan core self-evaluations och anställningsbarhet. Genom att uppmärksamma personer med låg grad av core self-evaluations blir det möjligt att satsa extra på dessa individer för att förstärka deras anställningsbarhet och därigenom deras hälsa samt mentala välbefinnande. För företagens del blir den förväntade vinsten nöjdare samt produktivare anställda<em>.</em></p>

I en allt mer flexibel och osäker arbetsmarknad, har individers uppfattning av sin anställningsbarhet påverkan på deras hälsa och mentala välbefinnande. Syftet med föreliggande studie var att undersöka om core self-evaluations kunde predicera anställningsbarhet, det vill säga individens bedömning av sina egna möjligheter att skaffa ett nytt, likvärdigt arbete. Datainsamlingen bestod av enkäter som besvarades av 406 anställda vid tre olika rikstäckande organisationer i Sverige vid två tillfällen (2005 och 2006). Hierarkisk regressionsanalys utfördes för att studera effekten av core self-evaluations på anställningsbarhet; då kontrollvariablerna kön, ålder samt utbildning, kontrollerades för. Resultatet visade på ett positivt signifikant samband mellan core self-evaluations och anställningsbarhet. Genom att uppmärksamma personer med låg grad av core self-evaluations blir det möjligt att satsa extra på dessa individer för att förstärka deras anställningsbarhet och därigenom deras hälsa samt mentala välbefinnande. För företagens del blir den förväntade vinsten nöjdare samt produktivare anställda.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of core self-evaluations (CSEs) and core external-evaluations (CEEs) on performance evaluations. It was hypothesized that people with higher levels of CSEs and CEEs would be more lenient in their performance ratings, when rating neutral performance. The second hypothesis of the study was that people with higher and lower CSEs would engage more in halo when rating neutral performance compared to people with average levels of CSEs. It was further hypothesized that CEEs would moderate the relationship between CSEs and performance ratings given. A total of 129 students from the Middle East Technical University participated in this study. They were given the core self- and external-evaluations scales, as well as two distractor scales (PANAS and Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale). They were later assigned randomly to either the neutral or the good performance vignette conditions, and asked to rate the performance of a departmental secretary whose performance was described in the vignette using two different performance rating forms that included the relevant performance dimensions and behaviors of the secretary. The first one of these forms is the Behavior Observation Scale (BOS) and the second one is the Graphic Rating Scale (GRS). The results showed that CSEs did not have a significant effect on the performance evaluations given. When the mood of the participants was controlled, however, people who had higher CSEs gave lower performance ratings to neutral performance than people who had lower CSEs, with the GRS as the rating form. Thus, the first hypothesis was not supported and even an opposite effect emerged. The second hypothesis found no support, as the standard deviations of the performance ratings given by people with high, low or average CSEs did not differ significantly from each other for the neutral performance vignette condition, even when the mood of the participants was controlled. However, the standard deviations of the ratings given by participants with average CSEs were higher than that of the participants with low and high CSEs for the good performance vignette condition. Hypothesis three was not supported either, as CEEs were not found to moderate the relationship between CSEs and the performance ratings.

No description available.

Many researchers have used the terms 'temperament' and 'personality' interchangeably when describing parents' behavioral styles. Although individual relationships among parents' temperament and personality, parenting behaviors, other parent characteristics, and young children's outcomes have been documented in the literature, parents' temperament and personality have not been examined collectively in conjunction with parenting and child outcome variables. As part of this study, 214 culturally diverse mothers with young children who ranged in age from 2- to 6-years rated their own temperament and personality, their parenting characteristics, and their young child's functioning (i.e., temperament and emotional and behavioral functioning). When examining mothers' temperament and personality together, factor analyses revealed a three-factor solution (i.e., General Life Approach, Rhythmicity, and Sticktoitiveness) and suggested that temperament and personality generally were separate but related constructs. Hierarchical and mediation regression analyses suggested the importance of examining both temperament and personality in the context of parenting behaviors and the outcomes experienced by young children. Overall, these findings suggested that mothers' temperament and personality play a significant role in parenting young children and optimizing young child outcomes. These findings are particularly helpful for professionals working with families experiencing difficulties dealing with their young child's difficult temperament styles as well as difficult emotional and behavioral functioning.

Emerging adulthood is a time rife with transitions, and is thus an important time period to study the various ways in which people both connect with and move away from others, or how they are socially oriented. Previous research has suggested a number of factors that contribute to social orientations, including social motivations, the self in relation to others, other-directed emotions and cognitions, and actual social behaviors. The current study examined what types of social orientations exist and how they relate to indices of relational and individual well-being in a sample of US emerging adults (N = 787). Using latent profile analysis, results suggest five types of social orientations, each showing a distinct pattern of moving toward and/or away from others and links to varying degrees of relational and individual well-being. Overall, results suggest that being overly oriented toward or away from others presents both relational and individual challenges, whereas more balanced approaches tend toward optimal outcomes. This study presents a unique and novel view of how emerging adults move toward and away from others, allowing for a more detailed discussion of social and nonsocial subtypes and the nuances of how and why they relate differentially to well-being. This is the first study to consider multiple aspects of social orientations, and as such provides one of the clearest and most detailed descriptions of social subtypes in emerging adulthood to date.