Rustin D. Meyer

A review and synthesis of situational strength in the organizational sciences.

Situational strength pertains to the idea that various characteristics of situations have the ability to restrict the expression and, therefore, the criterion-related validity of individual differences. Despite situational strength’s intuitive appeal, however, little information exists regarding its construct space. This review (a) categorizes extant operationalizations into four facets (constraints, consequences, clarity, and consistency), (b) examines the empirical literature on situational strength—relevant hypotheses, and, on the basis of the proposed taxonomy and literature review, (c) provides several avenues for future theoretical and empirical research. It is the authors’ hope that these efforts will encourage additional research and theorizing on this potentially important psychological construct.

Measuring Job-Related Situational Strength and Assessing Its Interactive Effects With Personality on Voluntary Work Behavior:

Situational strength has long been viewed as a useful way of conceptualizing and predicting person–situation interactions. Some have recently argued, however, that more rigorous empirical tests of its behavioral influence are sorely needed. The current article begins addressing this literature gap by (a) developing the Situational Strength at Work (SSW) scale, (b) examining the ways in which individual differences influence perceptions of situational strength, and (c) testing situational strength’s moderating effects on two types of voluntary work behavior (i.e., organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior). Results indicate strong psychometric properties for the SSW (thereby facilitating future organizational research on situational strength), support for theoretically based predictions regarding the role of individual differences in perceptions of situational strength, support for theoretically based moderator effects on organizational citizenship behavior, and the presence of countertheoretical (yet strong and consistent) moderator effects on counterproductive work behavior. Thus, this study makes several contributions to the situational strength literature but also reveals important areas for future theoretical development and empirical research.

Personality Strength and Situational Influences on Behavior A Conceptual Review and Research Agenda

Notwithstanding a recent flurry of organizational research on the construct of “situational strength,” research on the other side of the coin—“personality strength”—has rarely been conducted in organizational settings, has been scattered across multiple disciplines, has been called different things by different researchers, and has not yet been used to test theoretical propositions paralleling those in recent organizational research on situational strength. In the present review, drawing from several disparate research literatures (e.g., situational strength, personality states, traitedness, cross-situational consistency, scalability, appropriateness, self-monitoring, interpersonal dependency, hardiness, attitude strength, and self-concept clarity), we (a) define personality strength and contrast it with personality trait, personality strengths (plural), and layperson conceptualizations of the terms “strong personality” and “weak personality,” (b) briefly discuss the history of research related to personality strength, (c) identify a common prediction, emanating largely independently from several literatures, regarding the interactive effect of personality traits and personality strength on behavior, (d) articulate three novel predictions regarding the impact of personality strength on within-person situational and behavioral variability, (e) develop three broad categories of personality strength operationalizations (i.e., statistical, content-general, and content-independent) and discuss potential interrelationships among them, (f) suggest “best practices” for operationalization, thereby providing an agenda for future research, and, finally, (g) discuss the practical implications of this work for human resource management.

Selecting Null Distributions When Calculating rwg A Tutorial and Review

rwg is a common metric used to quantify interrater agreement in the organizational sciences. Finn developed rwg but based it on the assumption that raters’ deviations from their true perceptions are influenced by random chance only. James, Demaree, and Wolf extended Finn’s work by describing procedures to account for the additional influence of response biases. We demonstrate that organizational scientists have relied largely on Finn’s procedures, at least in part because of a lack of specific guidance regarding the conditions under which various response biases might be present. In an effort to address this gap in the literature, we introduce the concept of target-irrelevant, nonrandom forces (those aspects of the research context that are likely to lead to response biases), then describe how the familiar “5Ws and an H” framework (i.e., who, what, when, where, why, and how) can be used to identify these biases a priori. It is our hope that this system will permit those who calculate rwg to account for the effects of response biases in a manner that is simultaneously rigorous, consistent, and transparent.

Not Aggressive or Just Faking It? Examining Faking and Faking Detection on the Conditional Reasoning Test of Aggression:

Substantial research has been dedicated to examining and combating respondent misrepresentation (i.e., “faking”) on personality assessments. Two approaches to combat faking that have garnered particular attention include: (a) designing systems to identify likely fakers and (b) developing difficult-to-fake measures. Consistent with suggestions to combine these strategies, the present article examines a new faking detection system specifically designed for a difficult-to-fake measure (i.e., the Conditional Reasoning Test for Aggression; CRT-A). Four studies (a) help elucidate the conditions under which the CRT-A is fakeable, (b) provide initial construct validity evidence for the faking detection system developed here, (c) examine the effects of faking and faking detection on the CRT-A’s criterion-oriented validity, and (d) show that participants identify CRT-based faking detection items at worse-than-chance levels even when they are fully informed about how these items work. Taken together, these studies reinforce the importance of maintaining the indirect nature of CRTs but also show that the faking detection system developed here represents a promising method of identifying those who may have used inside information to manipulate their scores.