{"title":"OBHDP’s adoption of Level 2 Transparency and Openness Promotion guidelines","authors":"Michael D. Baer , Maryam Kouchaki","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2025.104389","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2025.104389","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"186 ","pages":"Article 104389"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143181797","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The small-world illusion: Overestimating the frequency of in-person interactions with acquaintances","authors":"Nadav Klein","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104387","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104387","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>People generate substantial informational benefits from their social networks, and acquaintanceships—“weak ties”—are an important component of these benefits. However, acquaintances typically do not have deep knowledge of one another’s schedules and do not plan their interactions ahead of time. The uncertain nature of interactions with acquaintances raises the possibility that people might not realize how often they actually occur. The present experiments find that people overestimate the frequency of interacting with acquaintances (Experiments 1a-2b). This occurs partly because of an availability bias whereby instances of crossing paths with acquaintances are more top-of-mind and readily available than ways in which acquaintances might “miss” each other (Experiments 3a-5). One consequence of this is that people overestimate opportunities for receiving help from acquaintances and thus miss out on such opportunities (Experiment 5). Acquaintances do not interact as frequently as they think, and this misperception can reduce the benefits of social networks.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"186 ","pages":"Article 104387"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143181798","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"“You knew what you were getting into”: Perspective differences in gauging informed consent","authors":"Rachel Schlund , Vanessa K. Bohns","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104386","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104386","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We examine differences between perceived and experienced consent in organizational contexts—specifically, the aspect of consent that reflects how <em>informed</em> consenters feel. We theorize that people tasked with soliciting consent overestimate the extent to which consenters feel fully informed of what they are agreeing to and thus feel they have truly consented. We provide support for these predictions across six pre-registered studies (<em>N</em> = 2,993) and eight supplemental pre-registered studies (<em>N</em> = 4,406) that establish causal and mediation evidence, downstream organizational consequences, and real-world relevance. This research reveals that even when an agreement meets the <em>legal</em> criteria for consent, there may be misaligned perceptions of employees’ <em>feelings</em> of consent, with consequences for employees’ relationship with their organization. The current studies offer a significant step forward in understanding the markedly understudied role of consent in organizations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"186 ","pages":"Article 104386"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143181799","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Pitch imperfect: How investors respond to entrepreneur disclosure of personal flaws","authors":"Lauren C. Howe, Jochen I. Menges","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104388","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104388","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>When entrepreneurs pitch to investors, is it wise for them to disclose their flaws or should they rather not admit any weaknesses? Combining research in entrepreneurial finance with social comparison theory, we put forth a new conceptual model about when disclosing flaws elicits psychological closeness and results in investment. We distinguish between two types of flaws (<em>agency-excess</em> and <em>agency-deficit</em>) and consider the similarity between entrepreneurs and potential investors in these flaws. A field study and several experiments generally support our model. Disclosing agency-excess flaws does not generate closeness or elicit investment, even when investors possess the same flaw. Disclosing agency-deficit flaws can generate closeness and result in investment, but only among investors who possess the same flaw. Our research contributes to the entrepreneurial finance literature by showing nuanced effects concerning how flaw disclosures relate to investments; we also show that similarities between entrepreneurs and investors do not always pay off.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"186 ","pages":"Article 104388"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143180946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The inclusion of anchors when seeking advice: Causes and consequences","authors":"Jessica A. Reif, Richard P. Larrick, Jack B. Soll","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104378","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104378","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Scholars have devoted considerable research attention to examining how people use advice from others. However, there is much less research exploring the preceding step of how people solicit advice from others. Sometimes advice seekers include their own thinking in their requests for advice, providing anchors that make it difficult for their advisors to access their own independent judgments. Across naturalistic and laboratory samples, we find that advice seekers include anchors when seeking quantitative advice between 20 and 50 percent of the time. In five preregistered studies (N = 6,981), we investigate the causes and consequences of including anchors when seeking advice. We find that impression management motives increase the tendency to include anchors when seeking advice, while a goal of minimizing influence on advisors reduces the tendency to include anchors. We then show that anchors are indeed effective in achieving impression management goals, but that advice seekers who include them benefit less from opinion combination strategies such as averaging because they introduce shared sources of error. This work contributes to the literatures on advice seeking, anchoring, and collective judgments.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"185 ","pages":"Article 104378"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142705079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Joining disconnected others reduces social identity threat in women brokers","authors":"Raina A. Brands , Pier Vittorio Mannucci","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104376","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104376","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article examines gender differences in social network brokerage. We theorize that whether women brokers experience social identity threat with downstream consequences for their creative performance depends on whether they use a separation (intermediating between network members) or a joining (bringing disconnected network members together) approach. Using a survey (Study 1), a pilot field study and an experiment (Study 2), and another experiment (Study 3), we demonstrate the following, respectively: (1) there are stereotypes favoring men in separation brokerage and stereotypes favoring women in joining brokerage; (2) women (vs. men) who take a separation approach to brokerage experience reduced creative self-efficacy, whereas no gender difference emerges among individuals who undertake a joining approach; and (3) women (vs. men) experience greater social identity threat when undertaking separation brokerage, with fear of backlash mediating the link between gender, creative self-efficacy and creative performance, whereas no gender difference emerges among individuals who undertake a joining approach to brokerage.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"185 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142441335","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The confrontation effect: When users engage more with ideology-inconsistent content online","authors":"Daniel Mochon , Janet Schwartz","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104366","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104366","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>People typically engage with information that aligns with their ideology and avoid information that challenges it. Here, we demonstrate that online users can become relatively more engaged with content that clashes with their ideology, a pattern we label the confrontation effect. We further show that the outrage evoked by ideology-inconsistent content drives the confrontation effect and reconcile our findings with the more commonly observed congeniality bias. We employ a multi-method approach to test this theoretical framework via observational field data from Twitter, a series field experiments on Facebook, and online lab experiments. Collectively, these findings provide a balanced perspective on the interplay between user ideology and online engagement, with important implications for both organizations and policymakers.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"185 ","pages":"Article 104366"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142418725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A Numeracy-Task interaction model of perceived differences","authors":"Daniel Villanova , Mario Pandelaere","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104375","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104375","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>When people evaluate numerical differences, they can focus on the relative differences or the absolute differences. However, it is unclear who does what and when. The authors propose the Numeracy-Task Interaction Model to provide a framework for understanding individuals’ subjective difference perceptions. With empirical support in four studies, the authors shed light on how numeracy relates to tendencies to weight absolute and relative differences, depending on the type of task at hand. The authors find that numeracy can reduce the influence of absolute differences for some tasks but increase their influence for others. Additionally, sensitivity to relative differences increases for some tasks but not others. These results not only support the model but also generate various recommendations for future research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"185 ","pages":"Article 104375"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142418726","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"On time or on thin ice: How deadline violations negatively affect perceived work quality and worker evaluations","authors":"David Fang , Sam J. Maglio","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104365","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104365","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Deadlines are a common feature of the modern workplace. While previous research has focused on how deadlines shape the behavior of those completing tasks, little is known about how deadlines may influence the judgment of individuals evaluating the submitted work. Through eight lab and field experiments, complemented by 10 supplemental studies (<em>N</em>=6,982), this investigation examines whether completing work early, on time, or late––independent of the quality of the work itself––influences perceptions of the quality of the submitted work and of the worker who submitted it. Results indicate that missing deadlines negatively influences evaluations of the worker and significantly diminishes the perceived quality of submitted work through a process of reductions in competence-related trust. This effect makes people less willing to work with late submitters in the future, and it is moderated by the perceived importance of the deadline and the reason for lateness. In contrast, submitting work early confers no benefit.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"185 ","pages":"Article 104365"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142322585","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}