Theme 3 2023

Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 39

THEME 3

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AT WORK

Department of Industrial Psychology



Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences
Prescribed literature and other sources

Prescribed reading
Woods & West (Prescribed textbook) Ch 2

Additional reading sources


Landy, F.J. & Conte, J.M. (2007).Work in the 21st century: An introduction to
Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Malden, MA.: Blackwell Publishing
[623 pp]. Chapter 2 Methods and Statistics in I-O Psychology, pp. 48 – 83
Learning outcomes

• Explain the meaning of and the basis for individual [psychological] differences

• Understand the major aspects of individual differences, personality and


intelligence including the related theoretical underpinnings

• Appreciate the implications of individual differences on behaviour - and


especially work behaviour (performance)

• Appraise the role of emotions and related psychological constructs on work


behaviour [performance]

• Understand how individual differences are measured. Explain the difference


between reliability and validity, and the different ways of establishing each.
Introduction to individual differences

• People differ in various ways and the differences have implications for
behaviour and thus performance

• Individual differences relevant to the work environment:


• Personality
• Intelligence/cognitive ability
• Emotions
• The relevance of individual differences to work and work performance
depends on context and time
• Understanding the effects of individual differences on work behaviour
requires an appreciation of the explicit (not implicit) theories of human
behaviour
Intelligence

• What is intelligence:
A very general mental capability that, among other things, involves
the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly,
comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from
experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic
skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather it reflects a broader and
deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings –
‘catching-on’, ‘making sense’ of things, or ‘figuring out’ what to
do.
Gottfredson (1997)

• Also known as Cognitive Ability or general mental intelligence


(GMA)
Intelligence - Models

 General intelligence/Ability Models


• Francis Galton and Alfred Binet
• Spearman’s G
 Specific Ability Models (Structure of Cognitive ability)
• Thurstone rejected the g notion altogether and proposed seven
primary abilities
• More related to/consistent with common occupational tests in
organisations
• Vernon proposed verbal/educational and Spatial/mechanical
• Cartel proposed Fluid ability and Crystallized ability
 A hierarchical model present both together, General (g) at the
top of the hierarchy with specific ability facets underneath.
Intelligence – The hierarchical model
Intelligence (Cognitive Ability) and Work

• There is a correlation between cognitive ability and performance (meta-


analysis studies – Woods & West Book, p.44, last paragraph) HOW?...
• …Cognitive ability impacts on the acquisition of knowledge about the job,
including the speed with which the knowledge is acquired [& transferred]
• The validity of the relationship varies with job complexity
• The relationship is moderated by context and time
Intelligence

Multiple intelligences

• The multiple intelligence school of thought represent what cognitive


theories ‘fails to’ capture: practical and social (Thorndike) intelligences.
• Emotional intelligence EI/EQ is one example of multiple-intelligence
and is defined as:
• The ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotions;
the ability to access and/or generate feelings when they facilitate
thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional
knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote
emotional and intellectual growth.
• EI is viewed as a powerful alternative to general intelligence (g) in
predicting success in life and work
• EI is assumed to be a strong predictor of managerial and leadership
success – EQ measures used in the selection of managers and leaders
Personality

Definition

• We are, as humans, implicit personality theorists –


everyday we seek to understand others’ personality and
to be understood…
• Personality can be defined as an individual’s unique
constellation of consistent behavioural traits
Personality and personality traits

• The Trait theory bolsters the widely accepted definition of


personality by emphasising the assumptions that personality is:
• internal
• stable (unchanged over time)
• consistent (apply across different situations)
• Different (unique to an individual)
• Situational theorists, however, challenge and/or expand the
trait theory by emphasising the importance of context
[situational consistency]:
• In contrast to the idea that traits apply across different situations,
they argue that traits are coherent responses to particular
situational cues
• people behave differently in different situations. e.g. at home and
work
Personality and personality traits

The Big Five Personality Theory


Personality development theories

Psychoanalysis
• Sigmund Freud
• The ‘id’ represents basic drive for instant gratification
• The “ego” mediates basic desires on the reality principle
• The “super-ego” represents social conscience

Behaviourism
• Pavlov & Skinner
• Explores how behaviour is shaped by the environment –
conditioning
• Do not consider internal processes

Social learning/Reciprocal determinism


• Albert Bandura
• Person, environment and behaviour [next slide]
• Observational learning
• Self-efficacy
Personality theories: Social learning

Reciprocal determinism
Personality and Work

• Personality [traits] influences job performance through the effect it


has on psychological reactions/states (attitudes) as well as work-
related behaviour, especially organisational citizenship behaviours.
Specific examples of both include:
• job satisfaction and commitment
• occupational interests
• team processes
• leadership behaviour
• Personality traits predict various forms of performance, i.e. specific
personality traits are more or less important in different jobs
The Big Five Model
Die Groot Vyf-model
Extraversion the extent to which a person is outgoing and sociable versus quiet and reserved
Ekstroversie die mate waarin 'n persoon uitgaande en gesellig is teenoor stil en teruggetrokke

Agreeableness the extent to which a person is warm and trusting, versus cold and unfriendly
Inskiklikheid die mate waarin 'n persoon warm en vertrouend is teenoor koud en onvriendelik

Conscientiousness the extent to which a person is organized and dependable, versus impulsive and
Pligsgetrouheid disorganized
die mate waarin 'n persoon georganiseer en betroubaar is teenoor impulsief en
ongeorganiseerd

Emotional stability the extent to which a person is calm and stable, versus neurotic and anxious
Emosionele stabiliteit die mate waarin 'n persoon kalm en stabiel is, teenoor neuroties en angstig

Openness/intellect the extent to which a person is imaginative and open to new experiences, versus
Openheid / intellek narrow-minded and unimaginative
die mate waarin 'n persoon verbeeldingryk en oop is vir nuwe ervarings , teenoor
eng en verbeeldingloos
Personality, Cognitive Ability and Work

Summary
• Cognitive ability is critical in the learning phase of the job (Woods & West,
p.45), but the influence thereof decreases as jobs become more familiar and
practiced
• Over time, other factors such as motivation [Theme 4] and personality
become increasing more important

• Personality traits relates more to organisational contextual


performance/organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB)
Emotions
• Emotions
• discrete reactions (e.g. anger; joy) directed towards a specific target or
cause

• Moods
• A global positive (pleasant) or negative (unpleasant) feeling.
• Not focused on a specific cause.
• May last for a few moments or even for a few weeks.

• Dispositional affect
• Represent the general tendency to experience positive or negative
feelings, moods and emotions
• Distinguish between positive and negative affectivity
Emotions and Work
• Although we distinguish between emotions and personality, it is
actually intertwined. The concepts of Core Self-Evaluations and
Psychological Capital is examples of this.
• Dispositional affect is more closely associated with personality
• Both, personality and emotions have implications for work-related
behaviours, positive or negative.
Emotions, personality and Work: Core Self-Evaluations

• The Core Self-Evaluation (CSE) represent a stable personality trait


and encompasses the way in which individuals fundamentally see
themselves. There evaluations happens at a subconscious level.

• The CSE construct is a composite of FOUR key affective tendencies


[attributes]:
• Self esteem: extent to which individuals feel good about
themselves
• Self-efficacy: how confident a person feels about his/her
capabilities with regard to a specific tasks
• Locus of control: the extent to which people feel in control of
events that affects their lives
• Neuroticism: the tendency to experience negative emotions and
thoughts
Emotions, personality and Work: Core Self-Evaluations

• In general, people high on CSE tend to be more confident,


positive and feel in control compared to those with low CSE
• CSE associated with job satisfaction as it influences how people
perceive their job characteristics (positively versus negatively)
• People with high CSE tend to seek and attain intrinsically more
rewarding jobs – due to more self-belief
• High Neuroticism (low CSE) is associated with an avoidant
approach to work tasks, activities and behavioural strategies
compared to those with low Neuroticism (& high on CSE)
• Overall CSE has a long-term impact on success and happiness at
work
Emotions, personality and Work: Psychological Capital

Psychological Capital (PsyCap)


•Builds from Positive Organisational Behaviour (POB)
•PsyCap can be defined as:
An individual’s positive psychological state of development that is
characterised by: (1) having confidence (self-efficacy) to take on and put in the
necessary effort to succeed at challenging tasks; (2) making a positive
attribution (optimism) about succeeding now and in the future; (3) persevering
toward goals and, when necessary, redirecting paths to goals (hope) in order to
succeed; and (4) when beset by problems and adversity, sustaining and
bouncing back and even beyond (resiliency) to attain success (Luthans,
Youssef & Avolio, 2007, p. 3 I )
•PsyCap is state-like and therefore open to development
•PsyCap is impactful on work-related performance
Measuring Individual Differences

• Unlike the measurement of physical characteristics, measuring


individual differences [psychological testing/psychometrics] is more
complex as it involves measuring latent constructs [unseen or
intangible attributes].
• A measure/scale/test [whether its for personality, cognitive ability,
emotions or any other psychological construct] should have the
following psychometric properties:
• Reliability – stability over time and internally consistent
• Validity – measure what it claims to measure
Measuring individual differences: Reliability

Methods of estimating reliability:


• Stability over time
• Test-retest method
• Internal consistency
• Split-half method
• Cronbach’s Alpha
• Different raters
• Inter-rater method
Measuring individual differences: Reliability

Stability over time / temporal stability

Test-Retest Reliability
•Test-retest reliability: Calculated by correlating measurements taken at time one
with measurement taken at time two
Measuring individual differences: Reliability

Internal consistency

Split-half reliability method


•Another way to estimate reliability of a test is to pretend that instead of
one test, there is two or more
•E.g. 100-item test and break into two 50-item tests, one consisting of all
the even-numbered items, and the other all the odd-numbered items
•Correlate the total scores of the two subtests
•Subtest scores correlate highly – test reliable – internal consistency
Measuring individual differences: Reliability

Internal consistency

Cronbach’s Alpha
• is the most commonly used method as it overcomes some of the
problems of the split-half method
• It considers the correlations between the individual test items - to
determine the extent to which they measure the same
unidimensional concept
Measuring individual differences: Reliability

Different raters

Inter-Rater Reliability
•Different individuals make judgement about a person
•E.g. ratings of performance of a worker made by several different
supervisors
•Calculate various statistical indices to show level of agreement
among raters: Inter-rater reliability
Measuring individual differences: Validity

Focuses on whether a measurement[test] measure the


constructs that it claims to measure, and the extend to which
the test predicts important criteria
The difference between validity and reliability
• Succinctly, validity relates to a measurement measuring what it claims to
measure
• Reliability, on the other hand, relates more to the consistency or stability
of measurement.
• A bull’s eye on the following figure shows what a “perfect” measure looks
like (adapted from Babbie, 1995, p. 128)

LOW RELIABILITY HIGH RELIABILITY HIGH RELIABILITY


LOW VALIDITY LOW VALIDITY HIGH VALIDITY
Validity

4 different sources of validity evidence:


• Face validity
• Criterion-related Validity
• Content-related Validity
• Construct-related Validity
Validity [framework]

• Conduct job analysis to identify the important


demands (e.g. tasks, duties) of a job and the human
attributes necessary to meet these demands
• Choose or develop a test (or other measure) to assess
those abilities. The test is called a predictor – used to
forecast another variable
• Measure of individual’s performance in meeting job
demands is called the criterion – variable we want to
predict
• Hypothesis that people who do better on the predictor
will also do better on the criterion
Validity

• Development and validation of the predictive hypotheses in selection

Landy, 2007 [Permission obtained]


Validity

1. Face Validity
•Validity approach that is demonstrated by the way the test looks in the
‘eyes’ of the test-takers.
•It is qualitative/subjective judgement about whether the test items appear
relevant for their purpose
•The perception of relevance makes test taking worthwhile, thereby
increasing test taking motivation
Validity

2.Criterion-Related Validity
•Validity approach that is demonstrated by correlating the test score with a
performance measure; improves researcher’s confidence in the inference
that people with higher test scores have higher performance
•Validity coefficient: Correlation between a test score (predictor) and a
performance measure (criterion)
•2 Designs:
• Predictive validity
• Concurrent validity
Validity

2. Criterion-Related Validity (Cont.)


2.1. Predictive validity
• Criterion-related validity design in which there is a time lag
between collection of the test data and the criterion data
• For example: test all applicants, then hire applicants without
using test scores; go back over time and collect performance
data
Validity

2. Criterion-Related Validity (Cont.)


2.2. Concurrent validity
•No lag between gathering the test scores and the performance data; the test is
administered to current employees and performance data is collected simultaneously
•Test scores correlated with performance scores to yield a validity coefficient
•If, positive and significant – test is made part of process
•Potential disadvantage:
• No information about those who are not employed by the organisation
• Technical implication: range restriction – only scores of those who scored
highly on the predictor – correlation coefficient may be artificially
depressed and not statistically significant
• Test-taking motivation may not be as high for those already employed
Validity

3. Content-Related Validity
•Demonstrates that the content of the selection procedure represents an adequate
sample of important work behaviours and activities and/or worker KSAOs defined
by the job analyses
•Analyse the job to determine most important tasks/duties and abilities to perform
those tasks
•Ask subject matter experts
•Analyse their answers to identify or develop possible predictors for testing them
Validity

4. Construct-Related Validity
•Focus on the permissibility of decisions or inferences regarding
psychological constructs
•Unlike the other forms, construct validity involves performing a range of
statistical analyses in order to establish an evidence base for the validity of
a measurement.
•Greater accumulation of evidence, the greater the confidence

You might also like