A Review and synthesis of situational strength in the organizational sciences

Journal of Management

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 121-140

  Meyer, Rustin D ^a   Dalal, Reeshad S ^b   Hermida, Richard ^b  

^a GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Interactionism; Moderator; Personality; Situational strength; Strong situation

Indexed keywords

EID: 73949134584     PISSN: 01492063     EISSN: 15571211     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0149206309349309     Document Type: Review

References (74)

1. Adkins, C.L., & Naumann, S.E. 2001. Situational constraints on the achievement-performance relationship: A service sector study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22: 453-465.
2. Aguinis, H., Beaty, J.C., Boik, R.J., & Pierce, C.A. 2005. Effect size using power in assessing moderating effects of categorical variables using multiple regression: A 30-year review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 94-107.
3. Aiken, L.S., & West, S.G. 1991. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4. Azen, R., & Budescu, D.V. 2003. The dominance analysis approach for comparing predictors in multiple regression. Psychological Methods, 8: 129-148.
5. Bacharach, S.B., & Bamberger, P.A. 2007. 9/11 and New York City firefighters' post hoc unit support and control climates: A context theory of the consequences of involvement in traumatic work-related events. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 849-868.
6. Barrick, M.R., & Mount, M.K. 1993. Autonomy as a moderator of the relationships between the big five personality dimensions and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 111-118.
7. Beaty, J.C., Cleveland, J.N., & Murphy, K.R. 2001. The relation between personality and contextual performance in strong versus weak situations. Human Performance, 14: 125-148.
8. Bowles, H.R., Babcock, L., & McGinn, K.L. 2005. Constraints and triggers: Situational mechanics of gender in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89: 951-965.
9. Chan, D. 1998. Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 234-246.
10. Chaplin, W.F. 1997. Personality, interactive relations, and applied psychology. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology: 873-890. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
11. Chatman, J.A. 1989. Improving interactional organizational research: A model of person organization fit. Academy of Management Review, 14: 333-349.
12. Chuang, A., Liao, W.C., & Tai, W.T. 2005. An investigation of individual and contextual factors influencing training variables. Social Behavior and Personality, 33: 159-174.
13. Colquitt, J.A. 2001. On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 386-400.
14. Cooper, W.H., & Withey, M.J. 2009. The strong situation hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13: 62-72.
15. Cortina, J.M. 1993. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 98-104.
16. Cronbach, L.J. 1957. The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12: 671-684.
17. Dalal, R.S., Lam, H., Weiss, H.M., Welch, E.R., & Hulin, C.L. In press. A within-person approach to work behavior and performance: Concurrent and lagged citizenship-counterproductivity associations, and dynamic relationships with affect and overall job performance. Academy of Management Journal.
18. Davis-Blake, A., & Pfeffer, J. 1989. Just a mirage: The search for dispositional effects in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 14: 385-400.
19. Deadrick, D.L., Bennett, L., & Russell, C.J. 1997. Using hierarchical linear modeling to examine dynamic performance criteria over time. Journal of Management, 23: 745-757.
20. deCharms, R. 1968. Personal causation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
21. Diez Roux, A.V. 2002. A glossary for multilevel analysis. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 56: 588-594.
22. Endler, N.S. 1993. Personality: An interactional perspective. In J. Hettema & I. J. Deary (Eds.), Foundations of personality: 251-268. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
23. Endler, N.S., & Parker, J.D.A. 1992. Interactionism revisited: Reflections on the continuing crisis in the personality area. European Journal of Personality, 6: 177-198.
24. Fleeson, W. 2007. Situation-based contingencies underlying trait-content manifestation in behavior. Journal of Personality, 75: 825-862.
25. Forehand, G.A., & von Haller Gilmer, B. 1964. Environmental variation in studies of organizational behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 62: 361-382.
26. Funder, D.C. 2006. Towards a resolution of the personality triad: Persons, situations, and behaviors. Journal of Research in Personality, 40: 21-34.
27. Funder, D.C., & Colvin, C.R. 1991. Explorations in behavioral consistency: Properties of persons, situations, and behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60: 773-794.
28. Gelfand, M.J., Lim, B.C., & Raver, J.L. 2004. Culture and accountability in organizations: Variations in forms of social control across cultures. Human Resource Management Review, 14: 135-160.
29. George, J.M., & Zhou, J. 2001. When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 513-524.
30. Greenberg, J. 2009. Everybody talks about organizational justice, but nobody does anything about it. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2: 181-195.
31. Hattrup, K., & Jackson, S.E. 1996. Learning about individual differences by taking situations seriously. In K. R. Murphy (Ed.), Individual differences and behavior in organizations: 507-547. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
32. Hormuth, S. 1986. The random sampling of experiences in situ. Journal of Personality, 54: 262-293.
33. Hough, L.M., & Oswald, F.O. 2008. Personality testing and I-O psychology: Asking questions, offering answers, discussing unknowns, and providing direction. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1: 272-290.
34. House, R., Javidian, M., Hanges, P., & Dorfman, P. 2002. Understanding cultures and implicit leadership theories across the globe: An introduction to Project GLOBE. Journal of World Business, 37: 3-10.
35. Ilies, R., & Judge, T.A. 2005. Goal regulation across time: The effects of feedback and affect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 453-467.
36. James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., Mulaik, S.A., & Ladd, R.T. 1992. Validity generalization in the context of situational models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77: 3-14.
37. Jansen, J.J.P., Van Den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. 2006. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52: 1661-1674.
38. Kristof-Brown, A.L., Zimmerman, R.D., & Johnson, E.C. 2005. Consequences of individuals' fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58: 281-342.
39. Leventhal, G.S. 1980. What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, & R. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research: 27-55. New York: Plenum.
40. Leventhal, G.S., Karuza, J., & Fry, W.R. 1980. Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preferences. In G. Mikula (Ed.), Justice and social interaction: 167-218. New York/ Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
41. Lissek, S., Pine, D.S., & Grillon, C. 2006. The strong situation: A potential impediment to studying the psychobiology and pharmacology of anxiety disorders. Biological Psychology, 72: 265-270.
42. March, J.G., & Simon, H.A. 1958. Organizations. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
43. Meyer, R.D., & Dalal, R.S. 2009. Situational strength as a means of conceptualizing context. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2: 99-102.
44. Meyer, R.D., Dalal, R.S., & Bonaccio, S. 2009. A meta-analytic investigation into situational strength as a moderator of the conscientiousness-performance relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30: 1077-1102.
45. Milgram, S. 1965. Some conditions of obedience and disobedience to authority. Human Relations, 18: 57-76.
46. Mischel, W. 1968. Personality and assessment. New York: John Wiley.
47. Mischel, W. 1973. Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality. Psychological Review, 80: 252-283.
48. Mischel, W. 1977. The interaction of person and situation. In D. Magnusson & N. S. Endler (Eds.), Personality at the crossroads: Current issues in interactional psychology: 333-352. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
49. Mischel, W. 1999. Implications of person-situation interaction: Getting over the field's borderline personality disorder. European Journal of Personality, 13: 455-461.
50. Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. 1995. A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102: 246-268.
51. Morgeson, F., Campion, M.A., Dipboye, R.L., Hollenbeck, J.R., Murphy, K., & Schmitt, N. 2007. Reconsidering the use of personality tests in personnel selection contexts. Personnel Psychology, 60: 683-729.
52. Morgeson, F.P., & Humphrey S.E. 2006. The Word Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 1321-1339.
53. Mullins, J.M., & Cummings, L.L. 1999. Situational strength: A framework for understanding the role of individuals in initiating proactive strategic change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12: 462-479.
54. Murphy, K.R., & Dzieweczynski, J.L. 2005. Why don't measures of broad dimensions of personality perform better as predictors of job performance? Human Performance, 18: 343-357.
55. Ones, D.S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Judge, T.A. 2007. In support of personality assessment in organizational settings. Personnel Psychology, 60: 995-1027.
56. O'Reilly, C.A., Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D.F. 1991. People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of Management Journal, 34: 487-516.
57. Peters, L.H., Chassie, M.B., Lindholm, H.R., O'Connor, E.J., & Kline, C.R. 1982. The joint influence of situational constraints and goal setting on performance and affective outcomes. Journal of Management, 8: 7-20.
58. Peters, L.H., & O'Connor, E.J. 1980. Situational constraints and work outcomes: The influence of a frequently overlooked construct. Academy of Management Review, 5: 391-397.
59. Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. 2002. Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
60. Rogers, C.R. 1954. Toward a theory of creativity. Etc., 4: 249-260.
61. Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55: 68-78.
62. Schmidt, F.L., & Kaplan, L.B. 1971. Composite versus multiple criteria: A review and resolution of the controversy. Personnel Psychology, 24: 419-434.
63. Schneider, B., Salvaggio, A.N., & Subirats, M. 2002. Climate strength: A new direction for climate research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 220-229.
64. Schneider, R.J., & Hough, L.M. 1995. Personality and industrial/organizational psychology. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology: 75-129. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
65. Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., & Wright, J.C. 1994. Intraindividual stability in the organization and patterning of behavior: Incorporating psychological situations into the idiographic analysis of personality. Personality Processes and Individual Differences, 67: 674-687.
66. Snyder, M., & Ickes, W. 1985. Personality and social behavior. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology, 3rd ed.: 883-948. New York: Random House.
67. Tett, R.P., & Burnett, D.D. 2003. A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 500-517.
68. Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. 1975. Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
69. Tinsley, H.E.A. 2000. The congruence myth: An analysis of the efficacy of the person-environment fit model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56: 147-179.
70. Weber, M. 1978. Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press. (Original work published 1922).
71. Weiss, H.M., & Adler, S. 1984. Personality and organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6: 1-50.
72. Withey, M.J., Gellatly, I.R., & Annett, M. 2005. The moderating effect of situational strength on the relationship between personality and provision of effort. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35: 1587-1608.
73. Zickar, M.J., Gibby, R.E., & Jenny, T. 2004. Job attitudes of workers with two jobs. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64: 222-235.
74. Zimmerman, R.D. 2008. Understanding the impact of personality traits on individuals' turnover decisions: A meta-analytic path model. Personnel Psychology, 61: 309-348.