Search results

The purpose of this chapter was to explore how the values of higher education institutions, and ultimately society, are conveyed through the curriculum of an institution. The arguments for focusing on a liberal education grounded in critical thinking are highlighted and then compared to the growing trend of occupational education being the central focus of a college education. The need to understand populist thinking in particular is aligned with the social responsibility that educational institutions carry in their charters. This means that the students and parents who pay tuition for their education want something to show for their investment, namely a level of compensation and employment that is perceived to be correlated with the expense of the degree. The competing views of education and training are then considered in a global context, noting the interconnectedness of the intellectual and business community around the globe. This chapter concludes by highlighting the importance of education and its impact on cultural understanding and engagement as a value, especially calling upon public policymakers to keep higher education leaders in check as they develop plans and expectations for their institutions.

We examine how authorities' use of fair decision-making procedures and power benevolently shape workers' impressions of them as competent and warm, which serve as a mechanism whereby authorities' behaviors shape workers' emotional responses. We investigate how the role of these impressions differs depending on authority gender and consider whether emotional responses differ for male and female subordinates.

We conducted a between-subjects experimental vignette study in which we manipulate an authority's behaviors and gender. We use multigroup mediation analysis to test our predictions.

Authorities who employ procedural justice and benevolent power elicit reports of heightened positive emotion experiences and intended displays and reports of reduced negative emotion experiences and intended displays. These behaviors also enhance views of authorities as competent and warm. The mediating role of impressions differs by authority gender. Authority behaviors prompt reports of positive emotions through conveying impressions that align with authorities' gender stereotypes (competence for men, warmth for women). In contrast, warmth impressions mediate effects of behaviors on reported negative emotions when authorities are men, whereas when authorities are women, benevolent power use directly reduces reported negative experience, and procedural justice reduces negative display. Female respondents are more likely to report positive emotion experience and display toward male authorities and negative display toward female authorities.

By examining competence and warmth impressions as mechanisms, we gain insight into how the process by which authority behaviors affect worker emotions is gendered and shed light on micro-level dynamics contributing to gender inequality at work.

To replicate and extend research on psychopathy and intrinsic interpersonal preferences under the broader umbrella of affiliation, intimacy and antagonism, this paper aims to examine motivational correlates of psychopathy in a nonclinical sample (N = 125).

We used a multimethod design, including self-reports, a behavioral task and a physiological assessment of motive dispositions (automatic affective reactions to stimuli of interpersonal transactions measured with facial electromyography).

Results showed that self-reported psychopathy was negatively associated with self-reported intimacy motive. In the same vein, via the social discounting task, this paper found a negative association between psychopathy and a tendency to share hypothetical monetary amounts with very close others. Finally, regarding fEMG findings, multilevel analyses revealed that although individuals with low levels of psychopathy reacted more positively to affiliative stimuli, individuals with high levels of psychopathy reacted equally positively to both affiliative and antagonistic stimuli, and these results were robust across psychopathy measures. Results remained mostly unchanged on the subscale level.

These findings highlight the contribution of multimethod assessments in capturing nuances of motivation. Implicit physiological measures might be particularly sensitive in capturing motive dispositions in relation to psychopathy. Identifying mechanisms that foster positive connections between psychopathic traits and nonprosocial tendencies may be theoretically and clinically informative, with implications for forensic and penal practices.

How do radical technological fields become naturalized and taken for granted? This is a fundamental question given both the positive and negative hype surrounding the emergence of many new technologies. In this chapter, we study the emergence of the US nanotechnology field, focusing on uncovering the mechanisms by which leaders of the National Nanotechnology Initiative managed hype and its concomitant legitimacy challenges which threatened the commercial viability of nanotechnology. Drawing on the cultural entrepreneurship literature at the interface of strategy and organization theory, we argue that the construction of a naturalizing frame – a frame that focuses attention and practice on mundane, “rationalized” activity – is key to legitimating a novel and uncertain technological field. Leveraging the insights from our case study, we further develop a staged process model of how a naturalizing frame may be constructed, thereby paving the way for a decrease in hype and the institutionalization of new technologies.

Collegiality is often discussed and analyzed as a challenged form of governance, a form of working that used to function well in universities prior to the emergence of contemporary and modern forms of governance. This seems to suggest that collegiality used to dominate, while other forms of governance are now taking over. The papers in volume 86 of this special issue support the notion of challenged collegiality, but also show that for the most part, nostalgic notions of “the good old days” are neither true nor helpful if we are to revitalize academic collegiality. After examining whether a golden age of collegiality ever existed, we discuss why collegiality matters. Exploring what are often described as limitations or “dark sides” of collegiality, we address four such “dark sides” related to slow decision-making, conflicts, parochialism, and diversity. This is followed by a discussion of how these limitations may be handled and what measures must be taken to maintain and develop collegiality. With a brief summary of the remaining papers under two headings, “Maintaining collegiality” and “Revitalizing collegiality,” we preview the rest of this volume.