The nonlinear effects of job complexity and autonomy on job satisfaction, turnover, and psychological well-being.

This study examines the interactive relationship between job complexity and job autonomy on job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and psychological well-being. It was hypothesized that the positive or motivating effects of job complexity are only realized when workers are given enough autonomy to effectively meet the challenges of complex jobs. Results show that not only do job complexity and job autonomy interact, but that the relationships to the outcome variables are curvilinear in form. Job complexity is shown to be both a motivator and a stressor when job autonomy is low. However, the most beneficial effects of job complexity occur when it is matched by a high level of job autonomy. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Proactive personality in the context of job complexity.

This study examined the moderating influence of proactive personality (i.e., a disposition to initiate change in the environment) on the relationship between job complexity and demands–abilities fit (i.e., the extent to which a person's ability level matches the job demands), job satisfaction, and turnover intentions. It was found that for workers with a high proactive personality, moderate-to-high job complexity was positively associated with demands–abilities fit and job satisfaction; negatively with turnover intentions. Conversely, for workers with a low proactive personality, moderate-to-high job complexity was negatively associated with demands–abilities fit and job satisfaction; positively with turnover intentions. Many of the relationships were also curvilinear. This research supports the expansion of work design and job enrichment theories to include individual differences and a consideration of nonlinear relationships. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

A two-dimensional model that employs explicit and implicit attitudes to characterize prejudice.

In the authors' 2-dimensional model of prejudice, explicit and implicit attitudes are used to create 4 profiles: truly low prejudiced (TLP: double lows), aversive racists (AR: low explicit modern racism/high implicit prejudice), principled conservatives (PC: high explicit modern racism/low implicit prejudice), and modern racists (MR: double highs). Students completed an Asian Modern Racism Scale and an Asian/White Implicit Association Test. The authors compared the 4 groups' prejudice-related ideologies (i.e., egalitarianism/humanism and social conservatism) and economic/political conservatism (Study 1, N=132). The authors also tested whether MR but not PC (Study 2, N=65) and AR but not TLP (Study 3, N=143) are more likely to negatively evaluate an Asian target when attributional ambiguity is high (vs. low). In support of the model, TLP did not hold prejudice-related ideologies and did not discriminate; AR were low in conservatism and demonstrated the attributional-ambiguity effect; PC did not strongly endorse prejudice-related ideologies and did not discriminate; MR strongly endorsed prejudice-related ideologies, were conservative, and demonstrated the attributional-ambiguity effect. The authors discuss implications for operationalizing and understanding the nature of prejudice. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)