Self-monitoring, self-selection, and prospective employment: individual differences in finding a workplace niche.

IF 1.9 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Journal of General Psychology Pub Date : 2022-10-01 Epub Date: 2021-04-20 DOI:10.1080/00221309.2021.1913396
Christopher Leone
{"title":"Self-monitoring, self-selection, and prospective employment: individual differences in finding a workplace niche.","authors":"Christopher Leone","doi":"10.1080/00221309.2021.1913396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Self-selection of different employment opportunities was predicted to be a function of dispositional differences in self-monitoring. In two studies, participants read two job descriptions containing attributes that matched the skills and needs of either high self-monitors or low self-monitors. Participants then indicated which job they would accept if offered both jobs and subsequently completed the 25-item Self-Monitoring Scale. Scale responses were used to create univariate/categorical (high vs. low self-monitors) and bivariate/two dimensional (acquisitive, protective) indices of self-monitoring. In Study 1, low self-monitors and high self-monitors chose personally congruent jobs. These divergent choices were observed regardless of the way (univariate model, alternative bivariate model) self-monitoring was assessed. In Study 2, these self-monitoring differences were moderated by job status. These moderated choices of jobs were obtained when self-monitoring was assessed in its conventional and acquisitive (i.e., impression management for gain) forms but not in its protective (i.e., impression management for self-defense) form. In both studies, sex differences did not account for self-monitoring differences. These findings suggest on-the-job differences between high and low self-monitors may represent self-selection processes occurring before job-based experiences.</p>","PeriodicalId":47581,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00221309.2021.1913396","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of General Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2021.1913396","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/4/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Self-selection of different employment opportunities was predicted to be a function of dispositional differences in self-monitoring. In two studies, participants read two job descriptions containing attributes that matched the skills and needs of either high self-monitors or low self-monitors. Participants then indicated which job they would accept if offered both jobs and subsequently completed the 25-item Self-Monitoring Scale. Scale responses were used to create univariate/categorical (high vs. low self-monitors) and bivariate/two dimensional (acquisitive, protective) indices of self-monitoring. In Study 1, low self-monitors and high self-monitors chose personally congruent jobs. These divergent choices were observed regardless of the way (univariate model, alternative bivariate model) self-monitoring was assessed. In Study 2, these self-monitoring differences were moderated by job status. These moderated choices of jobs were obtained when self-monitoring was assessed in its conventional and acquisitive (i.e., impression management for gain) forms but not in its protective (i.e., impression management for self-defense) form. In both studies, sex differences did not account for self-monitoring differences. These findings suggest on-the-job differences between high and low self-monitors may represent self-selection processes occurring before job-based experiences.

自我监督、自我选择和未来就业:寻找职场利基的个体差异。
不同就业机会的自我选择被预测为自我监控的性格差异的函数。在两项研究中,参与者阅读了两份工作描述,其中包含与高自我监控者和低自我监控者的技能和需求相匹配的属性。然后,参与者指出如果同时提供两份工作,他们会接受哪一份,然后完成25项自我监控量表。量表反应用于创建单变量/分类(高与低自我监控)和双变量/二维(占有性,保护性)自我监控指数。在研究1中,低自我监控和高自我监控选择了个人一致性工作。无论评估自我监测的方式(单变量模型,备选双变量模型)如何,都可以观察到这些不同的选择。在研究2中,这些自我监控的差异被工作状态所调节。这些适度的工作选择是在自我监控以传统和获取形式(即,为了获得的印象管理)进行评估时获得的,而不是在自我监控以保护形式(即,为了自卫的印象管理)进行评估时获得的。在这两项研究中,性别差异并不能解释自我监控的差异。这些发现表明,高自我监控和低自我监控之间的在职差异可能代表了在工作经验之前发生的自我选择过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of General Psychology
Journal of General Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
4.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The Journal of General Psychology publishes human and animal research reflecting various methodological approaches in all areas of experimental psychology. It covers traditional topics such as physiological and comparative psychology, sensation, perception, learning, and motivation, as well as more diverse topics such as cognition, memory, language, aging, and substance abuse, or mathematical, statistical, methodological, and other theoretical investigations. The journal especially features studies that establish functional relationships, involve a series of integrated experiments, or contribute to the development of new theoretical insights or practical applications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信