Knowledge that Transforms

= 515) experimentally increased the stakes of survey administration to approximate a selection context. Mean differences by ADHD status were present on both work-specific and general items for global conscientiousness and most facets, even under high stakes. However, these results are qualified by findings of measurement noninvariance on general and work-specific conscientiousness facet measures, suggesting scale mean differences by ADHD status may be driven by item content rather than construct-level differences. Together, the findings reinforce a need for ongoing investigation into the implications of using conscientiousness assessments with neurodivergent people. (PsycInfo Database Record

Integrating insights from team hierarchy literature and shared leadership research, we propose and test a model that illuminates the positive and negative team processes through which shared leadership relates to team creativity. We use a social network lens to examine both shared leadership level (indexed by team density of informal leadership ties) and shared leadership concentration (indexed by team centralization of such ties). With a sample of 136 work teams and three waves of surveys, we found that shared leadership concentration weakens the positive effect of shared leadership level on team creativity. We explicated the positive and negative mediating roles played by team information elaboration and team status conflict, respectively. Our findings show that shared leadership concentration serves as an enabler or inhibitor on which mediating mechanism is at play, such that when shared leadership concentration is higher, there is a negative indirect effect of shared leadership level on team creativity via team status conflict. By contrast, when shared leadership concentration is lower, shared leadership level has a positive indirect effect on team creativity via team information elaboration. Our work provides nuanced insights into how to maximize the potential benefits of shared leadership in enhancing team creativity. (PsycInfo Database Record

Although the literature on individual job crafting has proliferated over the past decade, research on the collaborative crafting efforts of organizational teams has lagged behind, which is surprising given the prominence of team-based arrangements in contemporary work and the importance of team proactivity in today's business environment. Drawing on proactive motivation theory and the literature on proactive performance in teams, this article presents a large-scale intervention study aimed at increasing team proactive motivation, including a pretest/posttest control group with 96 teams and 1,077 employees. We study the extent to which a team proactive motivation intervention is associated with changes in three dimensions of team crafting (task team crafting, relational team crafting, and cognitive team crafting) at both 6 months and 1 year after the intervention. We also examine the mediating role of change in the three team-level crafting dimensions in explaining the association between the intervention and change in team performance over time. Our results show that the intervention is positively associated with change in all three forms of team crafting. Furthermore, change in team crafting positively associates with change in team performance 6 months and 1 year after the intervention. (PsycInfo Database Record

Organizations are increasingly using teams to stimulate innovation. Often, these teams share knowledge and information with each other to help achieve their goals, while also competing for resources and striving to outperform each other. Importantly, based on their industry, the nature of work, or prior history, some teams may face more competition from peer teams than others. Our research examines how teams' competitive relations with other teams in the organization operate in tandem with their collaborative inter-team information exchange relations in impacting their innovation. Using two studies-a field study of 73 knowledge-intensive teams in high-tech engineering firms and a team-based network experimental study of 162 teams-we find that a high degree of overall competition with many peer teams reduces a focal team's ability to acquire and utilize diverse knowledge from these teams (i.e., inter-team knowledge integration), thereby hindering team innovation. However, applying insights from network structural hole theory, we find that when a focal team occupies a brokerage position in the inter-team information exchange network, this can help buffer the effects of competition in getting access to knowledge resources from other teams, thus enabling their innovation. Additionally, we find that focal broker teams' dealmaking and network obstruction behaviors explain these effects. (PsycInfo Database Record

Building on the strong consensus that the experience of power motivates individuals to take action, prior research postulates a positively reinforcing cycle wherein taking action leads to power, which in turn leads to subsequent actions. Applying regulatory focus theory, we differentiate between promotion-oriented and prevention-oriented actions to develop a within-person theory of when and why promotion-oriented and prevention-oriented actions should relate to power, and vice-versa. Across two studies, we find that when employees engaged in promotive voice behaviors, they were more likely to experience a sense of power; this effect was amplified for employees with trait promotion focus. When employees engaged in prohibitive voice behaviors, employees with trait prevention focus were less likely to experience a sense of power. The experience of power subsequently motivated employees to engage in promotive voice behaviors, but not prohibitive voice behaviors. By elucidating the differences between promotion and prevention pathways of action and power, our research challenges the notion that action and power positively reinforce each other. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings. (PsycInfo Database Record

(measurement and predictive). Overall, the general mental ability, verbal ability, and intellect AVI models captured similar behavioral manifestations of cognitive ability. Validity evidence results were mixed: For example, AVIs trained on observer-rated intellect exhibited superior convergent and criterion relationships (compared to the observer ratings they were trained to model) but had limited discriminant validity evidence. Our findings illustrate the importance of examining psychometric properties beyond convergence with the test that ML algorithms are trained to model. We provide recommendations for enhancing discriminant validity evidence in future AVIs. (PsycInfo Database Record

Organizational change has been thought to evoke negative employee responses, yet it is ubiquitous in modern market economies. It is thus surprising that the adverse effects of organizational change are not more visible or apparently disrupting. We hypothesized that, although perceived organizational change, by inducing change apprehension, stimulates negative employee responses (i.e., lower organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior [OCB]), it also elicits organizational nostalgia, which engenders positive employee responses (higher organizational commitment and OCB). We tested our hypotheses in nine studies. First, across four experiments (two preregistered), perceived societal or organizational change elicited organizational nostalgia and, via organizational nostalgia, increased employees' organizational commitment and OCB. Subsequently, in two preregistered experiments, induced organizational nostalgia (vs. control) strengthened employees' commitment to the changed organization and galvanized their defense of organizational change. Finally, in a preregistered follow-up experiment and two preregistered surveys, we tested and validated our full model regarding the opposing mediating roles of change apprehension and organizational nostalgia. The findings help to understand why effects of organizational change are less disruptive than might be expected and clarify the role of organizational nostalgia during organizational change. (PsycInfo Database Record

Salary comparison has well-established implications for employees' attitudes and behaviors at work. Yet how employees process information about simultaneous comparisons, particularly when internal and external comparison information is incongruent, remains controversial. In this article, we draw from the model of dispositional attribution and equity theory to predict how the incongruence of internal and external salary comparisons affects perceptions of distributive justice and subsequent employee withdrawal behavior. We hypothesized that the effect of salary comparisons on perceived distributive justice follows a hierarchically restrictive schema in which a lower salary in comparison to a referent has a greater effect than a higher salary. This further affects employee withdrawal (neglect, turnover intention, and voluntary turnover). We also propose that the effects of salary comparisons are bounded by employees' zero-sum construal of success. Three studies were conducted to test our hypotheses: a quasi-experimental study and two time-lagged field studies. Consistent with our hypotheses, we observed that, when comparison information was incongruent, underpayment compared with others more strongly affected perceived distributive justice than overpayment did. The subsequent impact on perceived distributive justice was negatively related to employee withdrawal. As expected, the effect of incongruent salary comparison information was stronger for employees with lower zero-sum construal of success. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record

s = 1,014 and 414), and then we train and test models using these different transcripts to score multiple constructs. We observed significant bias in the commercial ASR services across nearly all comparisons, with the magnitude of bias differing across the ASR services. However, the transcription bias did not translate into meaningful measurement bias for the ML interview scores-whether in terms of differential convergent correlations or means. We discuss what these results mean for the nature of bias, fairness, and validity of ML models for scoring verbal open-ended responses. (PsycInfo Database Record

. These measures were either newly developed or adapted from existing assessments to directly correspond with occupational variables from the Occupational Information Network database. Across three studies with diverse samples, we obtained extensive reliability and validity evidence to evaluate the fit assessments. Results consistently showed that integrating across fit domains led to practical improvements in predictions of relevant outcomes, including career choice and subjective and objective career success. However, some fit measures (i.e., interests and knowledge) were generally more predictive of outcomes than others (i.e., personality), thus warranting greater consideration for use in research and applied contexts. We discuss how our results advance theoretical and practical knowledge concerning the measurement of person-occupation fit in the modern labor market. Moreover, to inspire additional research and applications involving whole-person fit measurement, we made all newly developed fit assessments publicly available, providing guidance for using them with the Occupational Information Network database. (PsycInfo Database Record