CARELESSNESS AND DISCRIMINABILITY IN WORK ROLE REQUIREMENT JUDGMENTS: INFLUENCES OF ROLE AMBIGUITY AND COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY

Fundamental to effective human resource systems is the capture of data regarding work role requirements. However, previous research on factors that influence work role requirement judgments has been largely equivocal. From a sample of 203 incumbents, representing 73 unique occupations, we investigated 2 cognitive sources of influence on carelessness and discriminability in work role requirement judgments. We hypothesized that incumbents perceiving high role ambiguity would provide ratings that were more careless and showed less discriminability, and cognitively complex individuals would provide more careful and discriminating ratings. These influences were hypothesized to vary across different work descriptors and rating scales. Results were supportive, showing effects for cognitive complexity and role ambiguity on ratings, and differential effects depending on the focal descriptor and scale.

[1]  J. Bieri.  Cognitive complexity-simplicity and predictive behavior. , 1955, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[2]  T. Tripodi,et al.  Cognitive Complexity as a Function of Own and Provided Constructs , 1963 .

[3]  T. Tripodi,et al.  INFORMATION TRANSMISSION IN CLINICAL JUDGMENTS AS A FUNCTION OF STIMULUS DIMENSIONALITY AND COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY. , 1964, Journal of personality.

[4]  S. Lirtzman,et al.  Role Conflict and Ambiguity in Complex Organizations. , 1970 .

[5]  Walter S. Mueller.  Cognitive complexity and salience of dimensions in person perception1 , 1974 .

[6]  C. Schneier.  Operational utility and psychometric characteristics of Behavioral Expectation Scales: A cognitive reinterpretation. , 1977 .

[7]  J. H. Steiger.  Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. , 1980 .

[8]  Edwin T. Cornelius,et al.  A comparison of holistic and decomposed judgment strategies in job analyses by job incumbents. , 1980 .

[9]  Jerard F. Kehoe,et al.  Rater selective attention ability and appraisal effectiveness: The effect of a cognitive style on the accuracy of differentiation among ratees. , 1984 .

[10]  S. Jackson,et al.  A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings , 1985 .

[11]  R. Noe,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of the Relation of Job Characteristics to Job Satisfaction , 1985 .

[12]  Thomas M. Stutzman,et al.  AN EVALUATION OF METHODS TO SELECT RESPONDENTS TO STRUCTURED JOB‐ANALYSIS QUESTIONNAIRES , 1986 .

[13]  Michael P. Kirsch,et al.  Job Knowledge, Ratee Familiarity, Conceptual Similarity, and Halo Error: An Exploration. , 1986 .

[14]  Paul R. Sackett,et al.  Effects of using high- versus low-performing job incumbents as sources of job-analysis information. , 1987 .

[15]  Barry Gerhart,et al.  Sources of variance in incumbent perceptions of job complexity. , 1988 .

[16]  Robert J. Harvey,et al.  A comparison of holistic versus decomposed rating of Position Analysis Questionnaire work dimensions. , 1988 .

[17]  N. Schmitt,et al.  Internal analyses of task ratings by job incumbents. , 1989 .

[18]  E. Prien,et al.  EVALUATION OF TASK AND JOB SKILL LINKAGE JUDGMENTS USED TO DEVELOP TEST SPECIFICATIONS , 1989 .

[19]  S. Green,et al.  Evaluation of an index to detect inaccurate respondents to a task analysis inventory , 1990 .

[20]  Response Bias in Job Analysis Ratings: Relation between Ratings of Task Liking and Task Characteristics , 1991 .

[21]  Frank J. Landy,et al.  Job analysis: The composition of SME samples. , 1991 .

[22]  Walter C. Borman,et al.  Observation accuracy for assessors of work-sample performance: Consistency across task and individual-differences correlates. , 1991 .

[23]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  A power primer. , 1992, Psychological bulletin.

[24]  Douglas J. Sego,et al.  Impact of task experience and individual factors on training-emphasis ratings , 1993 .

[25]  John Tisak,et al.  The measurement properties of the role conflict and role ambiguity scales: A review and extension of the empirical research , 1993 .

[26]  Juan I. Sanchez,et al.  The impact of raters' cognition on judgment accuracy: An extension to the job analysis domain , 1994 .

[27]  James A. Breaugh,et al.  Measuring facets of job ambiguity: Construct validity evidence. , 1994 .

[28]  D. J. Abramis.  Work Role Ambiguity, Job Satisfaction, and Job Performance: Meta-Analyses and Review , 1994 .

[29]  P. Spengler,et al.  Stability of a 4 × 6 repertory grid for measuring cognitive complexity , 1994 .

[30]  Y. Ganzach.  Theory and configurality in expert and layperson judgment. , 1994 .

[31]  Y. Fried,et al.  Supervisors' role conflict and role ambiguity differential relations with performance ratings of subordinates and the moderating effect of screening ability. , 1995 .

[32]  Douglas E. Pine.  Assessing the Validity of Job Ratings: An Empirical Study of False Reporting in Task Inventories , 1995 .

[33]  M. Ronald Buckley,et al.  Cognitive complexity and the perceived dimensionality of pay satisfaction. , 1996 .

[34]  M. Quiñones,et al.  Task frequency rating accuracy : The effect of task engagement and experience , 1996 .

[35]  J. W. Cunnigham.  Generic Job Descriptors: A Likely Direction in Occupational Analysis , 1996 .

[36]  Michael A. Campion,et al.  Social and Cognitive Sources of Potential Inaccuracy in Job Analysis , 1997 .

[37]  Mark A. Wilson,et al.  The Validity of Task Coverage Ratings by Incumbents and Supervisors: Bad News , 1997 .

[38]  A. Sagie,et al.  Assessor type, number of distinguishable dimension categories, and assessment centre construct validity , 1997 .

[39]  Juan I. Sanchez,et al.  Moderators of agreement between incumbent and non‐incumbent ratings of job characteristics , 1997 .

[40]  S. Lloret,et al.  Construct Validity of Rizzo et al.‘s (1970) Role Conflict and Ambiguity Scales: A Multisample Study , 1998 .

[41]  Michael K. Lindell,et al.  Relationship between organizational context and job analysis task ratings. , 1998 .

[42]  Juan I. Sanchez,et al.  Understanding Within-Job Title Variance in Job-Analytic Ratings , 1998 .

[43]  Michael J. Miller,et al.  The development and evaluation of a computer-administered measure of cognitive complexity , 1998 .

[44]  Michael D. Mumford,et al.  Basic and cross-functional skills. , 1999 .

[45]  Edward L. Levine,et al.  Accuracy or consequential validity: which is the better standard for job analysis data? , 2000 .

[46]  Michael A. Campion,et al.  Accuracy in job analysis: toward an inference‐based model , 2000 .

[47]  T. Maurer,et al.  The Relationship Between SME Job Experience and Job Analysis Ratings: Findings with and without Statistical Control , 2000 .

[48]  Judith M. Collins,et al.  Jackson and Schuler (1985) Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of the Relationships Between Role Ambiguity, Role Conflict, and Job Performance , 2000 .

[49]  Robert J. Harvey,et al.  Yes Virginia, thereis an objective reality in job analysis , 2000 .

[50]  Michael D. Mumford,et al.  UNDERSTANDING WORK USING THE OCCUPATIONAL INFORMATION NETWORK (O*NET): IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND RESEARCH , 2001 .

[51]  Juan I. Sanchez,et al.  Selection or Training? A Two-Fold Test of the Validity of Job-Analytic Ratings of Trainability , 2001 .

[52]  Erich C. Dierdorff,et al.  A meta-analysis of job analysis reliability. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[53]  S. Gosling,et al.  Development of personality in early and middle adulthood: set like plaster or persistent change? , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[54]  C. Muntaner,et al.  Descriptive dimensions of US occupations with data from the O*NET , 2004 .

[55]  F. Morgeson,et al.  Self-presentation processes in job analysis: a field experiment investigating inflation in abilities, tasks, and competencies. , 2004, The Journal of applied psychology.

[56]  Filip Lievens,et al.  Inferring Competencies 2 Easing the Inferential Leap in Competency Modeling : The Effects of Task-Related Information and Subject Matter Expertise , 2004 .

[57]  Dan J. Putka,et al.  Modeling error variance in job specification ratings: the influence of rater, job, and organization-level factors. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[58]  F. Landy,et al.  The Relationship Between Work Attitudes and Job Analysis Ratings: Do Rating Scale Type and Task Discretion Matter? , 2005 .

[59]  W. Borman,et al.  TIME‐SPENT RESPONSES AS TIME ALLOCATION STRATEGIES: RELATIONS WITH SALES PERFORMANCE IN A STOCKBROKER SAMPLE , 2006 .

[60]  John Schaubroeck,et al.  A FIELD EXPERIMENT TESTING SUPERVISORY ROLE CLARIFICATION , 2006 .