Bing Mark N, Stewart Susan M, Davison H Kristl, Green Philip D, McIntyre Michael D, James Lawrence R
School of Business Administration, University of Mississippi, University, MS 38677-1848, USA.
J Appl Psychol. 2007 May;92(3):722-44. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.722.
This study presents an integrative typology of personality assessment for aggression. In this typology, self-report and conditional reasoning (L. R. James, 1998) methodologies are used to assess 2 separate, yet often congruent, components of aggressive personalities. Specifically, self-report is used to assess explicit components of aggressive tendencies, such as self-perceived aggression, whereas conditional reasoning is used to assess implicit components, in particular, the unconscious biases in reasoning that are used to justify aggressive acts. These 2 separate components are then integrated to form a new theoretical typology of personality assessment for aggression. Empirical tests of the typology were subsequently conducted using data gathered across 3 samples in laboratory and field settings and reveal that explicit and implicit components of aggression can interact in the prediction of counterproductive, deviant, and prosocial behaviors. These empirical tests also reveal that when either the self-report or conditional reasoning methodology is used in isolation, the resulting assessment of aggression may be incomplete. Implications for personnel selection, team composition, and executive coaching are discussed.
本研究提出了一种针对攻击性的人格评估综合类型学。在这种类型学中，自我报告和条件推理（L. R. 詹姆斯，1998）方法被用于评估攻击性人格的两个不同但通常一致的组成部分。具体而言，自我报告用于评估攻击性倾向的显性组成部分，如自我感知的攻击性，而条件推理用于评估隐性组成部分，特别是用于为攻击行为辩护的推理中的无意识偏见。然后将这两个不同的组成部分整合起来，形成一种新的针对攻击性的人格评估理论类型学。随后，利用在实验室和实地环境中从3个样本收集的数据对该类型学进行了实证检验，结果表明，攻击性的显性和隐性组成部分在预测适得其反、偏离正轨和亲社会行为时可能会相互作用。这些实证检验还表明，当单独使用自我报告或条件推理方法时，由此产生的攻击性评估可能是不完整的。文中还讨论了对人员选拔、团队构成和高管辅导的启示。
