MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of an Economic Recession on Leader Personality and General Mental Ability Scores

2011· article· en· W1883450318 on OpenAlexaff
Chet Robie, Tammy Emmons, Kathleen A. Tuzinski, Tracy Kantrowitz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Selection and Assessment · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecessionPsychologyPersonalityWorkforceSample (material)Consistency (knowledge bases)UnemploymentInternal consistencyScale (ratio)Social psychologyBig Five personality traitsDemographic economicsClinical psychologyPsychometricsEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Economic recessions have wide-ranging implications for the workforce. The science and practice of industrial and organizational psychology are certainly not immune to those implications. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of an economic recession on leader personality and general mental ability scores in three samples (nTime 1=564; nTime 2=581; nTime 3=281) of US bank employees. The samples differed primarily in level of unemployment in the general US economy (Time 1=4.67%; Time 2=7.77%; Time 3=9.77%) with samples matched on five branches located in cities throughout the United States. Internal consistency reliabilities and similar variances and covariances across samples were found to be statistically indistinguishable. However, statistically significantly higher personality scale means in the Time 2 and Time 3 samples were evidenced in comparison to the Time 1 sample. Additional analyses suggested that these mean differences would result in different percentages of individuals being selected at seven of nine selection ratios. Implications, limitations, and future research are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.354 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Selection and AssessmentSame topicPersonality Traits and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207