Suchergebnisse

The present study analyzed retirement intentions and behavior as part of a work role withdrawal process. We examined the influences of the organizational and group contexts in the process of work role exit by means of two sources of work role expectations: human resource practices and group norms. Three different types of human resource practices were taken into consideration: performance enhancement practices, retirement enhancement practices, and organizational pressures toward retirement. Furthermore, three types of retirement indicators were analyzed: age considering retirement for the first time, early retirement intentions, and retirement age. Hierarchical regression analyses were carried out on a sample of 270 retirees to test the hypotheses. Results showed that retirement enhancement practices and organizational pressures toward retirement predict all the retirement indicators. Moreover, group norms moderated the relationships between retirement enhancement practices and two out of the three outcomes: age considering retirement for the first time and retirement age. Overall, our findings showed that organizational and group contexts play an important role in the retirement process. Moreover, our results indicate an interaction between organizational and group factors in the work role exit process.

Drawing from the experiences of 3,126 enlisted men from North Carolina who fought for the Confederacy in the U.S. Civil War, this article focuses on the determinants of desertion. I argue that men deserted because their identity as Southerners was eroded by an emergent localism, sustained and organized within the Confederate army. Desertion rates were highest in companies that evidenced a high degree of local homogeneity — company solidarity thus bred rather than reduced desertion rates. There is no support for any of the historical models of desertion that search for individual-level determinants, such as social class, occupation, status, family structure, age, or time of enlistment. Finally, contextual variables seem to be weak proxies for the central variable accounting for desertion — the emergence of a localist identity.

The experiment reported herein examined how depersonalization, operationalized as the lack of individuating information, affects conformity to a group norm in anonymous computer-mediated communication. Participants made a decision about choice dilemmas and exchanged their decisions and supporting arguments with three ostensible partners via computer, who unanimously endorsed the position opposite of the participant's. As predicted, depersonalization led to a more extreme perception of the group norm, better recall of the interactants' arguments, and more positive evaluations of the interactants' arguments through group identification, albeit only for women. Moreover, depersonalization was more likely to facilitate conformity to group norms among those with higher need for public individuation and among women. A test of indirect effects showed that group identification and extremity of the perceived group norm mediated the effects of depersonalization on conformity.

Employees increasingly interact through social networking platforms in the workplace. A distinguishing feature of these platforms is their ability to build a sense of community (SOC)—the feelings of membership, influence, integration, and fulfillment of needs, and shared emotional connection. Yet much remains to be understood as to the way these platforms contribute to building a SOC at workplaces. This study examines whether organizational members exhibit community-like behaviors and processes in intranet communication. The study also tests a theoretical model in which members' perceptions of the group's norms affect the antecedents of SOC. The results of a survey of 112 employees revealed that both exchanging and observing support increased feelings of SOC. Furthermore, the perception of group norms mediated the relationship between observing and exchanging support and SOC. This study contributes to the field of business communication by applying a theory-based framework to intranets and empirically testing the role of group norms in shaping online communication behaviors at workplaces.

This paper investigates the effects of war experiences across three different levels (individuals, groups, and contexts) on moral judgments related to violations of humanitarian norms. Competing hypotheses derived from different theoretical perspectives are empirically evaluated. Social psychological studies of war traditionally highlight a reversal of morality and group norms justifying violence against outgroups. Rationalistic models insist on the importance of realistic costs on the choice of individuals. As a complement to these traditions, we suggest that situations in which risks are generalized across group boundaries tend to provoke a strengthening of principles, such as humanitarian norms, that enable the protection of the material and symbolic integrity of a community. Multilevel analyses of the international People on War survey dataset (N = 8,121) show that support for the ingroup's struggle, at both individual and group levels, predicts stronger justification of violence. Simultaneously, at the context level, generalization of war‐related risks predicts stronger condemnation of violations of humanitarian principles. These findings are consistent with a collective vulnerability model and, only in part, with the intractable conflict model.

The present paper articulates a model in which ingroup and outgroup norms inform 'rational' decision-making (cost-benefit analysis) for conflict behaviors. Norms influence perceptions of the consequences of the behavior, and individuals may thus strategically conform to or violate norms in order to acquire benefits and avoid costs. Two studies demonstrate these processes in the context of conflict in Québec. In the first study, Anglophones' perceptions of Francophone and Anglophone norms for pro-English behaviors predicted evaluations of the benefits and costs of the behaviors, and these cost-benefit evaluations in turn mediated the norm-intention links for both group norms. In the second study, a manipulated focus on supportive versus hostile ingroup and outgroup norms also predicted cost-benefit evaluations, which mediated the norm-intention relationships. The studies support a model of strategic conflict choices in which group norms inform, rather than suppress, rational expectancy-value processes. Implications for theories of decision-making and normative influence are discussed.

Unwritten but generally accepted & informally enforced norms of conduct exist in the US Senate. These folkways hold that new members ought to serve an unobtrusive apprenticeship, that all members should devote a major share of their time & energy to the strictly legislative aspect of their jobs, that Senators should specialize in a few areas of policy, that Senators should be emotionally devoted to the Senate & its ways The Senate could not operate with its present org & rules without these folkways. However, not all Senators adhere to them. A distinguished pre-Senate career, higher pol'al ambitions, constituency problems & a `liberal' pol'al ideology all encourage non-conformity. Senators who conform to the folkways are rewarded by high peer group esteem & tend to be more 'effective' legislators than non-conformists. IPSA.

The Senate of the United States, we are told, is a "club." The image, while hopelessly imprecise and occasionally quite misleading, does have at least one advantage: it underscores the fact that there are unwritten but generally accepted and informally enforced norms of conduct in the chamber. These folkways influence the behavior of senators to a degree and in directions not yet fully understood. "There is great pressure for conformity in the Senate," one member (mercifully varying the simile) has recently said. "It's just like living in a small town." And, as in small-town life, so too in the Senate there are occasional careers to be made out of deliberate nonconformity, sometimes only skin-deep, but sometimes quite thorough-going.

The present paper articulates a model in which ingroup and outgroup norms inform 'rational' decision-making (cost-benefit analysis) for conflict behaviors. Norms influence perceptions of the consequences of the behavior, and individuals may thus strategically conform to or violate norms in order to acquire benefits and avoid costs. Two studies demonstrate these processes in the context of conflict in Québec. In the first study, Anglophones' perceptions of Francophone and Anglophone norms for pro-English behaviors predicted evaluations of the benefits and costs of the behaviors, and these cost-benefit evaluations in turn mediated the norm-intention links for both group norms. In the second study, a manipulated focus on supportive versus hostile ingroup and outgroup norms also predicted cost-benefit evaluations, which mediated the norm-intention relationships. The studies support a model of strategic conflict choices in which group norms inform, rather than suppress, rational expectancy-value processes. Implications for theories of decision-making and normative influence are discussed.

This paper explores how government venture capitalists approve or reject financing applications. Based on longitudinal observations, complemented by interviews, documentation, and secondary data, the findings show the limited influence of the regulative and normative logics (e.g., formal guidelines and accepted behavior) on government venture capitalists' decisions. Instead, individual decisions are observed to be largely overshadowed by cognitions and heuristics, which dominate formal regulations and socially constructed group-level norms. Although official decision communications state that regulations have been followed, the evidence suggests that the cognitive logic dominates the funding decision-making process through a set of overshadowing forces that restrict the influence of the normative and regulative logics on funding decisions. This research has implications for venture financing and highlights the importance of cognitions in shaping venture capital decisions. ; fi=vertaisarvioitu|en=peerReviewed|