Knowledge that Transforms

= .03). Importantly, operational validities for job performance were larger for job-specific JKTs (.34) than for nonjob-specific tests (.19) and when the criteria included job knowledge (.41) than when they did not (.22). In addition, JKTs administered to job applicants (.32) or current employees (.29) in organizational settings were associated with higher validity than tests administered to people seeking certification in their chosen field (.20). Finally, we tested the mediating role of job knowledge between other antecedents and job performance. Job knowledge statistically fully mediated the relationship between cognitive ability and job performance, partially mediated the relationship between job experience and performance, and did not mediate the relationship between conscientiousness and performance. Overall, these results provide a contemporary synthesis of validity evidence for JKTs in various situations, as well as the role job knowledge plays in other predictors of job performance. (PsycInfo Database Record

Given the importance of experiencing fulfilling and productive workdays, scholars have focused on ways to boost employees' daily engagement and performance, suggesting this may be accomplished by increasing meaningfulness of their work tasks. However, an alternative approach may be needed in multifaceted work contexts where employees need to complete sets of varied tasks each day, including tasks that lack meaningfulness. To address this issue, we integrate the workday design perspective with research on residual engagement to examine implications of strategically sequencing tasks in terms of their meaningfulness. We theorize that because of a process we refer to as engagement cascade, performing the day's most highly meaningful tasks earlier and in a concentrated manner will tend to produce higher levels of daily engagement relative to sequences in which the most highly meaningful tasks occur later or are disbursed. We use agent-based modeling to formalize the engagement cascade process and generate specific predictions regarding how daily engagement is impacted by different task meaningfulness sequences. Findings from an intensive longitudinal design study with National Aeronautics and Space Administration and Russian Space Agency crew members (Study 1), an experience sampling field experiment with full-time employees (Study 2), and two controlled laboratory experiments with undergraduates (Study 3 and Supplement to Study 3) provide support for our hypotheses. Specifically, the decreasing task meaningfulness sequence engendered higher levels of daily engagement and, in turn, daily performance, relative to the increasing, inverted U-shaped, and U-shaped sequences. (PsycInfo Database Record

This introductory article to the special issue "Social Impact Research" examines the extent to which research published in the Journal of Applied Psychology has addressed pressing social issues related to work and employment.Using BERTopic modeling on 5,865 empirical articles published from the journal's inception in 1917 through June 2024, we identified 99 topics organized into 25 higher order themes, five of which directly reflect social impact: workplace stress, health, and well-being; workplace diversity, equity, and inclusion; organizational justice, ethics, and legal issues; work and employment transitions across the lifespan; and social justice and labor opinions.Trend analyses from 1980 to 2024 revealed growth in health and well-being research, relatively stable publication of diversity, equity, and inclusion scholarship, an inverted-U trajectory for justice and legal topics, and the disappearance of labor-related research.We then introduce the 19 special issue articles (appearing in the October and November 2026 issues) which address employment barriers facing marginalized and economically disadvantaged workers, medical benefits and leave policies, gender and women's employment, and macrolevel societal disruptions, each offering actionable implications related to work that can benefit the greater good.We conclude by proposing a future social impact research agenda that suggests industrial-organizational (I-O) psychologists conduct research that addresses key issues such as economic insecurity, immigrant and refugee workers, generative artificial intelligence, climate change, and political instability.

Prevailing theories of teamwork propose that a team's cognitive, affective, and motivational states (i.e., emergent states) and its members' interdependent actions (i.e., team processes) are inherently dynamic. Nevertheless, much of the existing literature overlooks critical components of theories on system dynamics (e.g., inertia, coevolution, feedback) and has largely failed to consider how time operates, ultimately leading to a predominantly static view of teams. To extend our understanding of team dynamism, we synthesized over 3,000 correlation coefficients from longitudinal studies, representing more than 11,000 teams on average. Using cross-lagged, meta-analytic structural equation models, we found that (a) emergent states and team processes exhibit inertia over time, although this varies by construct (affect exhibits the least inertia, while conflict exhibits the most); (b) some constructs (team affect and team cognition) tend to coevolve with team processes over time, whereas others (team motivation and team conflict) are consistently predicted by earlier team processes; (c) team performance exhibits consistent feedback loops, predicting subsequent emergent states and processes, which, in turn, predict later performance; and (d) the length of time between observations moderates these dynamics. Drawing on these results, we outline several key theoretical considerations for understanding team dynamics, highlight important methodological considerations for conducting longitudinal causally identified teams research, and offer recommendations for advancing beyond the current static perspective to a more dynamic understanding of teams. (PsycInfo Database Record

= 321, 1,780 observations), we assessed to what extent these profiles replicated in an independent sample and extended the investigation by including work-related antecedents and next-day work outcomes. Results indicated that daily recovery activities cluster together into identifiable profiles that largely replicated across samples. The identified profiles exhibited unique relationships with recovery experiences, well-being, and work outcomes. Our findings add to the recovery literature by illustrating the merits of considering profiles of recovery activities and their characteristics rather than studying recovery activities in isolation. (PsycInfo Database Record

Traditionally, situational judgment tests (SJTs) include text-based situations and ask candidates to pick the best and worst response option.Over the years, various new SJT paradigms have been developed to increase validity, reduce incidental cognitive load, and/or lower costs.Examples are multimedia SJTs, constructed response SJTs, and single-response SJTs.First, this study investigates how the traditional SJT paradigm performs in terms of criterion-related validity by updating prior meta-analyses.Second, this study provides initial, meta-analytic evidence on the criterion-related validity and cognitive load of several new SJT paradigms.On the basis of 457 independent samples from 302 studies (total N = 244,257), results showed that SJTs were not only predictive of job performance but also of academic performance, organizational citizenship behavior, and counterproductive work behavior.SJT validity was higher in operational (i.e., applicant) settings than in nonoperational settings and could also be expanded to new content (e.g., emotion and cross-cultural management).In terms of comparing traditional and new SJT paradigms, multimedia SJTs had validity equal to text-based ones but lower cognitive load.Importantly, the multiple-choice modality did not significantly outperform written constructed response modalities in terms of validity, and the cognitive loading of webcamconstructed responses was even lower than that of other response modalities.The implications of these findings are among others discussed in the context of the cost effectiveness of SJTs vis-à-vis other selection procedures.

How employees' personal stock holdings perform during the day has become increasingly visible and accessible, yet research has rarely examined how fluctuations in those holdings shape employees' experiences at work. Integrating cross-domain spillover and regulatory focus theories, we propose that morning fluctuation in personal stock holdings spills over into the workplace by influencing employees' risk propensity-their willingness to take or avoid risks-and, in turn, their risk-related workplace behaviors. Specifically, drawing from regulatory focus theory, we propose that a more positive (vs. negative) fluctuation in personal stock holdings than usual is associated with subsequent increases (vs. decreases) in employees' willingness to engage in risk. In a 10-day experience sampling study of full-time employees who personally invest in the South Korean stock market, a more positive morning fluctuation in stock holding value than they typically experience predicted higher state risk propensity, which subsequently led to greater risk-taking behavior and voice. These indirect effects were moderated by long-term orientation, such that employees lower (vs. higher) in long-term orientation showed greater sensitivity to morning fluctuation in stock holding value. We then conducted two complementary experiments that supported the theorized regulatory focus mechanism by demonstrating that more positive fluctuation in personal stock holdings elicited promotion focus, whereas more negative fluctuation heightened prevention focus, and that these motivational states subsequently shaped employees' willingness to engage in risk. Together, these findings highlight employees' personal stock holdings as an overlooked source of daily behavioral variability at work. (PsycInfo Database Record

In today's competitive environment, followers are increasingly assigned to work on multiple teams simultaneously (i.e., multiple team membership), oftentimes led by multiple leaders. While existing scholarship suggests that a leader's positive behaviors can spill over to positively impact follower motivation and task performance in another team (led by another leader), we reveal that a leader's aversive behaviors (e.g., abusive supervision) on one team are associated with a cross-leader differentiation pattern in another team. Drawing on contrast-based perspectives, and building on reactive compensation research, we argue that abusive supervision by one leader is associated with more favorable evaluations of an alternative leader, particularly when the latter leader engages in lower levels of abusive supervision. Across two scenario-based experiments and a field study, we find consistent support for this pattern: Abusive supervision by one leader is positively related to satisfaction with another leader, which is in turn associated with performance in that leader's team. These findings contribute to the abusive supervision and multiple team membership literatures by showing how employees differentiate between leaders across teams, and we discuss implications for theory and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record

= 37,105). Together, these studies show that job hoppers are penalized, the penalty is warranted, and career progression and prehire experience can weaken the impact of the penalty. (PsycInfo Database Record

Polynomial regression analysis (PRA) has played a central role in recent advances in congruence theory and research. Yet, the potential of PRA depends on careful management of extrapolation. We organize extrapolation around two broad uses of PRA in congruence research: theory development and theory application. In theory development, extrapolation concerns drawing inferences (conclusions) about theorized response-surface features beyond regions supported by the observed data. In theory application, extrapolation concerns making predictions beyond the observed data range. Within theory development, we further distinguish inadvertent and purposeful extrapolation. We conceptualize inadvertent extrapolation not as a merely methodological artifact but as a symptom of deeper misalignment among theory, method, and data. To manage theory development extrapolation, we propose a five-step strategy that can be routinely applied in PRA studies: (1) contextualize theory, (2) design for full-range sampling, (3) examine empirical support in the joint predictor space, (4) restrict interpretation to empirically supported regions, and (5) leverage purposeful extrapolation to guide theory building and future research. We also introduce Convex Hull, an app that visually distinguishes observed from extrapolated regions in the joint predictor space. Using empirical illustrations and simulations, we demonstrate both the risks of inadvertent extrapolation and the benefits of our strategy. This approach strengthens theoretical precision, empirical transparency, and cumulative theory development in congruence research and beyond. (PsycInfo Database Record