Discussion: View Thread

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 118, Iss. 1, 2012

  • 1.  Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 118, Iss. 1, 2012

    Posted 03-27-2012 00:27

    Dear colleagues,

     

    Below pls. see the new issue of OBHDP. Hope you feel excited about these papers as I do!

     

    Xiao-Ping

     

     

    New Volume/Issue is now available on ScienceDirect

     

    Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

    Volume 118, Issue 1,  Pages 1-98, May 2012

    Modify or Remove My Alerts

     

     

    1.

    Cover 2 - Editorial Board/Barcode   

    Pages IFC-

     

     

      Call for Papers

     

     

    2.

    Special issue on Social norms and cultural dynamics   

    Pages 1-3

     

     

      Regular Articles

     

     

    3.

    Effects of team knowledge management on the creativity and financial performance of organizational teams   Original Research Article

    Pages 4-13
    Sun Young Sung, Jin Nam Choi

    Highlights

    ► We examine the effects of knowledge management on team creativity and performance. ► Team knowledge utilization was positively related to team creativity. ► The systematic cognitive style of leaders was positively related to team creativity. ► Team creativity increased financial performance of the team.

     

     

     

    4.

    Follow the crowd in a new direction: When conformity pressure facilitates group creativity (and when it does not)   Original Research Article

    Pages 14-23
    Jack A. Goncalo, Michelle M. Duguid

    Highlights

    ► Conformity pressure can stimulate group creativity under certain conditions. ► Only if the norm is to be individualistic as opposed to collectivistic. ► Only if the group is composed of relatively uncreative people. ► Conformity pressure stifles highly creative people regardless of norm content.

     

     

     

    5.

    Why groups perform better than individuals at quantitative judgment tasks: Group-to-individual transfer as an alternative to differential weighting   Original Research Article

    Pages 24-36
    Thomas Schultze, Andreas Mojzisch, Stefan Schulz-Hardt

    Highlights

    ► We present first evidence for G–I transfer in group judgment. ► We find no evidence for differential weighting based on expertise or accuracy. ► G–I transfer offers an alternative explanation for the superior accuracy of groups. ► When G–I transfer is controlled, groups performed at the level of their average member.

     

     

     

    6.

    The moderating role of decision task goals in attribute weight convergence   Original Research Article

    Pages 37-45
    Kwanho Suk, Song-Oh Yoon

    Highlights

    ► Prior research showed low convergences among methods for measuring attribute weights. ► One determinant of convergence is the common processing goals of the tasks. ► Results showed convergences improve among measures with the same processing goals. ► The results have managerial implications when selecting weight measurement types.

     

     

     

    7.

    In the eyes of the beholder? The role of dispositional trust in judgments of procedural and interactional fairness   Original Research Article

    Pages 46-59
    Emily C. Bianchi, Joel Brockner

    Highlights

    ► Dispositional characteristics can influence perceptions of fairness. ► Across three studies, more trusting people had more positive fairness perceptions. ► Fairness perceptions mediated the relationship between trust and work attitudes.

     

     

     

    8.

    Blind in one eye: How psychological ownership of ideas affects the types of suggestions people adopt   Original Research Article

    Pages 60-71
    Markus Baer, Graham Brown

    Highlights

    ► We examine change adoption as a function of psychological ownership and change type. ► Ownership propels people to embrace change that adds to their possessions. ► Change that shrinks people's possessions are shunned by those with ownership. ► Effects can be explained by sense of personal loss and negative affect people feel.

     

     

     

    9.

    The perceived functions of linguistic risk quantifiers and their effect on risk, negativity perception and decision making   Original Research Article

    Pages 72-81
    Marie Juanchich, Miroslav Sirota, Christina Lea Butler

    Highlights

    ► Probability terms interpreted as likelihood-communication or face-management device. ► Face-management directed toward the hearer but also toward the speaker. ► Interpretations determined hearers' risk and severity perceptions and decision making.

     

     

     

    10.

    An examination of the proportional difference model to describe and predict health decisions   Original Research Article

    Pages 82-97
    Claudia González-Vallejo, Jason L. Harman, Etienne Mullet, Maria T. Muñoz Sastre

    Highlights

    ► The proportional difference (PD) model of the SDM theory was tested in health domains. ► The domains deal with decisions under risk and certainty. ► PD was compared to logically derived alternative utility models and to the Priority Heuristics. ► PD's single trade-off process performed well in multiple model tests.

     

     

    Send my e-mail in plain text format

     

    Access the ScienceDirect Info site if you have questions about this message or other features of this service.

     

     

    This email has been sent to you by ScienceDirect, a division of Elsevier B.V., Radarweg 29, 1043 NX Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Tel.+31 20 485 3911.

    ScienceDirect respects your privacy and does not disclose, rent or sell your personal information to any non-affiliated third parties without your consent, except as may be stated in the ScienceDirect online privacy policy.

    By using email or alert services, you agree to comply with the ScienceDirect Terms and Conditions.

    To unsubscribe to alert services, please go to the Alerts page.

    Copyright © 2012 ScienceDirect. All rights reserved. Any unauthorized use, reproduction, or transfer of this message or its contents, in any medium, is strictly prohibited. ScienceDirect® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V.

    Delivery Job ID: 11251:423346472:11257:356187276