Search results

Engineers at the Energy Systems Laboratory at Texas A&M University conducted short term energy metering studies at a complex of offices in northern Texas and several buildings on the Texas A&M University campus. These studies typically consisted of installing electrical metering at the whole building level and included sub‐metering of selected circuits when possible. A staged shut‐down sequence was performed for all lighting, fan, and mechanical systems of interest in the facility. Lighting system load verification was the primary goal. The study was a follow‐up to an earlier lighting study that had been conducted by the campus energy office. Base electrical load data were also determined from these tests, and in both studies significant “base” electrical loads were found. This paper presents results of these studies and suggests that the method is attractive to both contractors and facility energy managers as well.

The focus of the study was to explore the understanding of family among homeless adults in Southeast Texas. We incorporated both qualitative and quantitative methods by interviewing two key groups (short-term homeless, long-term homeless) over a 16-week period. Thirty homeless participants were interviewed using 18 questions designed to explore their understanding of family and the social supports that lead to resiliency. Participant ages ranged from 19 to 56 with an average of 44 years. Twenty-six participants were male and four were female. Half of all homeless participants claimed to lack familial support from either biological family or close friends. Among short-term homeless individuals, five of seventeen identified their biological family as fulfilling the role of a traditional family, while among long-term homeless adults, five of thirteen identified their friends as fulfilling the role of a familial unit. A recurring theme emerged in which participants defined family as those individuals who were consistently accessible for support, whether biological relations or non-related friends and companions. As we seek to improve our programs of assistance and advocacy, these findings become important as a step toward honoring our clients and recognizing the validity of their perceived realities as we reconstruct the models by which we facilitate interaction and intervention.

David G. Allen earned his Ph.D. from the Beebe Institute of Personnel and Employment Relations at Georgia State University. He is an assistant professor of Management in the Fogelman College of Business and Economics at the University of Memphis. His current research interests include the flow of people into and out of organizations, and technology implications for human resource management.Michelle M. Arthur is an assistant professor in the Anderson Schools of Management at the University of New Mexico. She received her Ph.D. in Labor and Industrial Relations from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her current research focuses on diversity supporting human resource practices and firm-level outcomes.Murray R. Barrick is the Stanley M. Howe Leadership Chair at the Henry B. Tippie College of Business at the University of Iowa. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Akron in Industrial-Organizational Psychology. He was recognized with the “Outstanding Published Paper Award” in 1992 by the Scholarly Achievement Award Committee of the Human Resources Division of the Academy of Management, and in 2001, was the recipient of the Owens Scholarly Achievement Award from the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP). In addition, in 1997, he was elected a fellow of SIOP. He also serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, and has served on the Editorial Board of the Journal of Management.Ronald M. Bearden received his MS in Quantitative Psychology from the University of Wisconsin. He is currently a Personnel Research Psychologist with the Navy Personnel Research, Studies, & Technology (NPRST) Department, working in the area of selection and classification. He is the principal investigator for the Navy’s efforts to develop a mulitifaceted non-cognitive assessment battery that will be utilized for identifying Navy personnel likely to perform well in the recruiting environment. He has over twenty years of experience working in the area of large-scale Navy selection and classification research programs.Walter C. Borman received his Ph.D. in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from the University of California (Berkeley). He is currently CEO of Personnel Decisions Research Institutes and is a professor of Industrial-Organizational Psychology at the University of South Florida. He is a fellow of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, and in 1994–1995 served as President of the Society. Borman has written more than three hundred books, book chapters, journal articles, and conference papers. He recently co-edited the I/O volume of the Handbook of Psychology (Borman, Ilgen & Klimoski, 2003), and, with two PDRI colleagues, wrote the personnel selection chapter for the 1997 Annual Review of Psychology. He also has served on the editorial boards of several journals in the I/O field, including the Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, Human Performance, and the International Journal of Selection and Assessment. Dr. Borman’s areas of interest are performance measurement, personnel selection, job analysis, and assessment centers.Kenneth G. Brown is an assistant professor and Huneke Faculty Research Fellow at the Henry B. Tippie College of Business at the University of Iowa. He received his M.A. and Ph.D. in Industrial-Organizational Psychology from Michigan State University. Ken does research and consulting in the areas of technology-delivered training and knowledge transfer. For work in this area, Ken received the 2002 American Society of Training and Development and the 2003 Society of Human Resource Management Research Awards. He currently serves on the editorial board of the Journal of Management.Alison Cook is a doctoral candidate in Organizational Behavior at Purdue University. Her primary research interests include individual-level and firm-level outcomes of the work-family interface. Her other interests include organizational justice, gender, and diversity research.Brian R. Dineen received his Ph.D. in Human Resource Management/Organizational Behavior from the Max M. Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University in 2003. Prior to his time in graduate school, he served four years as a Division Officer in the U.S. Navy. He is currently an assistant professor of Management in the Gatton College of Business and Economics at the University of Kentucky. His primary areas of interest include Internet-based recruitment and selection and the impact of team fluidity on team processes and outcomes. His work has appeared in the Journal of Applied Psychology, Public Personnel Management, and Journal of Management (forthcoming), and he has presented at national conferences such as the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology and the Academy of Management.William L. Farmer received his Ph.D. in Quantitative Psychology (with sub-specialization in Industrial-Organizational) from the University of Oklahoma. He is currently a Personnel Research Psychologist with the Navy Personnel Research, Studies, & Technology (NPRST) Department, working in the area of selection and classification. He is the program manager/principal investigator for the Navy’s efforts to develop a mulitifaceted non-cognitive assessment battery that will be utilized to improve the quality of enlisted selection and classification. He has over ten years of experience working in the area of large-scale employee selection programs.Kerri L. Ferstl earned her M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in Industrial-Organizational Psychology from the University of Minnesota. She is a senior research associate in the Minneapolis office of Personnel Decisions Research Institutes. She has worked with many public and private sector clients designing and implementing customized human resource tools for use in selection, development, promotion, and performance appraisal. Her work has appeared in Personnel Psychology and the Journal of Vocational Behavior.Rodger W. Griffeth earned his Ph.D. from the University of South Carolina. He is the Freeport-McMoran Chair of Human Resource Management at the University of New Orleans. His primary research interest is investigating employee turnover processes.Jerry W. Hedge earned his doctorate in I/O Psychology in 1982 from Old Dominion University. He has been involved in personnel research for more than 25 years. He has worked with both public and private sector clients designing, implementing, and evaluating numerous tools, systems, and techniques. He has extensive experience in job analysis and competency modeling; performance measurement; selection system development and validation; training program design, development and evaluation; and attitude assessment. Dr. Hedge is currently an independent consultant; during his career he has been employed by both public and private organizations, most recently serving as President and COO for Personnel Decisions Research Institute. Over the years, Dr. Hedge has stayed actively involved in conducting applied research, publishing his research in books and journals, and presenting regularly at professional conferences. He is a fellow of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology and the American Psychological Association.Jennifer D. Kaufman earned her master’s and Ph.D. degrees in Industrial-Organizational Psychology from Tulane University. She has worked with law enforcement, the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Army while employed as a Research Scientist with Personnel Decisions Research Institutes. As a Customer Leader now with DeCotiis Erhard Inc., Dr. Kaufman continues to partner with customers to develop selection and performance management systems. Dr. Kaufman received her Master’s degree and Ph.D. in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from Tulane University. Throughout her academic career, Dr. Kaufman has received academic awards, honors and fellowships, and was chosen for a two-year appointment as the Industrial/Organizational Psychology representative for the American Psychological Association’s Science Student Council which reports directly to the Board of Scientific Affairs. In addition, Dr. Kaufman’s research has been published in academic journals and books. Her research has also been presented at numerous national conferences such as the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, the Academy of Management, and the Interdisciplinary Conference on Occupational Stress and Health.Timothy A. Judge is the Matherly-McKethan Eminent Scholar in Management at the University of Florida. He received his M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Tim’s research interests are in the areas of personality and individual differences, leadership and influence behaviors, internal and external staffing, and job attitudes. He is a SIOP and American Psychological Association Fellow. In 1995, Tim received the Ernest J. McCormick Award for Distinguished Early Career Contributions from the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, and in 2001, he received the Larry L. Cummings Award for mid-career contributions from the Organizational Behavior Division of the Academy of Management. Tim currently sits on 6 editorial boards, including the Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.Todd J. Maurer received his Ph.D. in industrial-organizational psychology from the University of Akron. He was employed at Georgia Institute of Technology and will join the faculty of Georgia State University in Fall 2003 as Professor of Management. In 2002 he won the Sidney A. Fine Award for Research on Analytic Strategies to Study Jobs from the Society for Industrial-Organizational Psychology (SIOP) and was elected to Fellow of SIOP in 2003. He has consulted or conducted applied research on issues including aging workers, employee testing and selection, learning and development, performance appraisal, job analysis, and legal concerns. Some of the research he has conducted has been supported by private organizations, the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health and SIOP. He has served on the editorial boards of Personnel Psychology and Journal of Management.Raymond A. Noe is the Robert and Anne Hoyt Designated Professor of Management in the Department of Management and Human Resources at The Ohio State University. He received his BS in Psychology from The Ohio State University and his M.A. and Ph.D. in Psychology from Michigan State University. Professor Noe’s teaching and research interests are in Human Resource Management, Organizational Behavior, and Training and Development. He has published articles on training motivation, employee development, work and non-work issues, mentoring and team processes in the Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Vocational Behavior, and Personnel Psychology. Professor Noe is currently on the editorial boards of Personnel Psychology, Academy of Management Learning and Education, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and Journal of Business and Psychology. Professor Noe has authored three textbooks, Fundamentals of Human Resource Management, Human Resource Management: Gaining a Competitive Advantage, and Employee Training and Development, all published with Irwin McGraw-Hill. He has received awards for his teaching and research excellence, including the Herbert G. Heneman Distinguished Teaching Award, the Ernest J. McCormick Award for Distinguished Early Career Contribution and election as a fellow of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, and the American Society for Training & Development Research Award in 2001.Robert W. Renn holds a doctorate in Business Administration from Georgia State University’s College of Business Administration. He is an associate professor of Management in the Fogelman College of Business and Economics at the University of Memphis. His dissertation research focused on job design and his current research interests center on improving work motivation and work performance through self-regulation, goal setting, performance feedback, and work design.Christina E. Shalley is a professor of Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management in the DuPree College of Management at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She received her Ph.D. in Business Administration from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her current research interests include investigating the effects of various social and contextual factors on employees’ creativity and examining ways to structure jobs and the work environment to support creative and innovative work. She has published in such journals as Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. She also serves on the editorial board of the Journal of Management.Kennon M. Sheldon is an associate professor of Social Psychology at the University of Missouri-Columbia. His primary research interests concern goals, motivation, psychological well-being, creativity, and the resolution of social dilemmas. He received a $30,000 Templeton Prize in 2002 for his contributions to the emerging field of “positive psychology.” Ken has published one book, Self-Determination Theory in the Clinic: Motivating Physical and Mental Health (Yale University Press, 2003), and has another book in press, Approaching Consilience: Exploring Optimal Human Being (Erlbaum Press, to appear in 2004).Bennett J. Tepper is a professor in and chair of the Department of Management in the Belk College of Business Administration at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. He received his Ph.D. in Organizational Psychology from the University of Miami and served on the faculty of the University of Kentucky where he held Ashland Oil and Gatton Research Professorships. His research on organizational justice, leadership, and prosocial and antisocial organizational behavior has appeared in various outlets including the Academy of Management Journal, the Journal of Applied Psychology, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.Daniel B. Turban is a professor of Management at the University of Missouri. He earned his M.A. and Ph.D. in Industrial-Organizational Psychology from the University of Houston. His current research interests include self-determination theory, recruitment processes and applicant attraction, and dyadic relationships in organizations. Dan has served on the editorial boards of Journal of Applied Psychology and Academy of Management Journal.Connie R. Wanberg is currently the Carlson Professor of Human Resources and Industrial Relations and an adjunct professor of Psychology at the University of Minnesota. She received her Ph.D. in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from Iowa State University in 1992. Her research has focused on issues such as unemployment, job-search behavior, career indecision, organizational change, employee socialization, and employee development, and has been funded by a variety of agencies including National Institute of Mental Health, Department of Labor, and the Society for Human Resource Management Foundation. She has consulted with a variety of government organizations and is on the editorial review boards of the Journal of Applied Psychology and Personnel Psychology.Elizabeth M. Weiss received her Master’s degree from the Georgia Institute of Technology in 2001 and is working on her Ph.D. Her research interests include employee learning and development and the role of technology in social science research. Her work on these and related topics has been published in Computers in Human Behavior and Behavior and Information Technology, and is soon to appear in Journal of Applied Psychology and Journal of Applied Social Psychology. She is currently working in the field of performance improvement and training development.Elizabeth T. Welsh is a Ph.D. student in Human Resources and Industrial Relations at the University of Minnesota. She also has a Masters in Business Administration from UCLA. Before returning to school, she was Vice-President of Human Resources for a software company. She has been a consultant and worked at companies including First Boston and Microsoft. Her research interests include employee development and staffing.Kimberly A. Wrenn earned her Master’s degree and is a Ph.D. candidate in Industrial-Organizational Psychology at Georgia Institute of Technology. She has published research in the areas of employee development and selection. She is employed at Management Psychology Group where she has conducted job/task analysis, test development, selection system development and validation, and 360-degree surveys.Kelly L. Zellars is an assistant professor of Management at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. She received her bachelor’s and M.B.A. degrees from the University of Notre Dame, her M.S.T. from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and her Ph.D. in Business Administration from Florida State University. Dr. Zellars has focused her research interests in the areas of job stress and burnout, personality, and perceptions of fairness. She has published in journals such as Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and Journal of Applied Social Psychology.Jing Zhou is an associate professor of Management and Mays Fellow in the Management Department at the Mays Business School at Texas A&M University. She received her Ph.D. degree from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her current research interests include contextual factors that promote or inhibit employee creative performance. She has published in such journals as Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management, and Personnel Psychology. Currently, she serves on the editorial boards of Journal of Applied Psychology and Journal of Management. Beginning in fall 2003, she will join the Jones Graduate School of Management at Rice University as an associate professor of Management.

Drawing on interviews with men and women gun carriers, this paper considers the intersection of femininity and guns. It argues that two sets of expectations shape the normative relationship between women and guns: First, armed women are a blind spot in feminist discourse, which tends to reproduce the “pacifist presumption” that women are nonviolent caretakers and peacemakers. Second, contemporary pro-gun discourse often bases women’s gun carry within their duties and obligations as mothers in a form of “martial maternalism.” Inflected with a post-feminist appropriation of rights and equality, this pro-gun discourse reproduces gender binaries through a discourse of gender inclusivity. Following previous analyses that emphasize the contradictory politics of gender in conservative spaces, my analysis emphasizes how the gendered politics of guns is sustained by multiple, though not necessarily shared, understandings of women’s guns by men and women within American gun culture.

The purpose of this study is to examine whether work-related technology use outside of work and around family members could produce technoference or phubbing, where time spent with family members is interrupted by or intruded upon by technology use. The authors also examined its impact on work-to-family spillover, feelings of overload, life satisfaction and job satisfaction for workers.

Via an online survey, the authors assessed the frequency of technoference due to work, work-to-family spillover, feelings of overload, life satisfaction and job satisfaction. The authors’ analytic sample included US parents (95 fathers and 88 mothers) who worked for pay and experienced technoference in their relationships, which was at least sometimes due to work.

Results reveal possible impacts of technoference related to work on employee feelings of work-to-family spillover, greater feelings of overload, lower life satisfaction and lower job satisfaction.

Data are from a cross-sectional online survey, and results are correlational. Although the authors have theoretical/conceptual evidence for the impacts of technoference, it is possible that the direction of effects could be reversed or even bidirectional. Experimental/intervention work could further examine whether changes in technology use at home due to work improve employee well-being.

The authors’ findings suggest that organizational policies which promote healthy boundaries and work-life balance are likely fundamental to employee well-being and that employers should be mindful of employees' work-related technology use at home.

This study examines technoference and phubbing due to work while at home, as opposed to focusing on the at-work context.

This study aims to investigate the mental health treatment journeys of stigmatized consumers using user-generated content (UGC) while also examining the role of UGC in the journey.

This study offers valuable insights from 68 distinct, stigmatized consumers through a qualitative content analysis of 73 YouTube product review videos related to ten antidepressants. Data is coded, combining inductive coding with theory to provide a nuanced interpretation. Applying the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation to traditional consumer journey concepts, the analysis of UGC is structured by a unique mental health treatment journey.

The findings show that consumers use UGC to destigmatize their mental health treatment by engaging in dynamic reflection throughout their journey, rather than following traditional feedback models. Unlike typical consumption patterns, where search is limited to the initial stage, these consumers search at every journey phase while sharing insights that offer valuable support to others which, sometimes they report, is reciprocated by viewers.

Theoretically, this study introduces an innovative framework blending psychological and marketing theories to address a gap in health-care service marketing literature concerning long-term mental health treatment journeys. By introducing the concept of dynamic reflection, it demonstrates how consumers actively engage in and share insights throughout their treatment process, differing from traditional feedback models, and highlights the impact of UGC on health-care service provision.

Findings could inform potential health-care provider interventions that may improve treatment effectiveness.

Although stigmatized consumers’ experiences have been examined, their treatment experiences have not been framed within a journey framework.

Thirty-two qualitative research reports on co-teaching in inclusive classrooms, identified through a comprehensive literature search, are reviewed. Studies have included significant diversity in grade level, geographical location, setting, and took place in three different countries. Overall, teachers and administrators reported a high degree of satisfaction with co-teaching. However, a number of needs were also addressed, including administrative support, appropriate caseloads, planning time, student skill level, and co-teacher compatibility. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Purpose: The current study aims to cast light on the divide between academic research in management accounting and its applicability to practice by examining, from the standpoint of nursing, how this gap is perceived and what challenges may be involved in bridging it.

Design/Methodology/Approach: The current study compares the findings of Tucker and Parker (2014) with both quantitative as well as qualitative evidence from an international sample of nursing academics.

Findings: The findings of this study point to the differing tradition and historical development in framing and addressing the research–practice gap between management accounting and nursing contexts and the rationale for practice engagement as instrumental in explaining disciplinary differences in addressing the research–practice gap.

Research Implications Despite disciplinary differences, we suggest that a closer engagement of academic research in management accounting with practice “can work,” “will work,” and “is worth it.” Central to a closer relationship with practice, however, is the need for management accounting academics to follow their nursing counterparts and understand the incentives that exist in undertaking research of relevance.

Originality/value: The current study is one of the few that has sought to look to the experience of other disciplines in bridging the gap. Moreover, to our knowledge, it is the first study in management accounting to attempt this comparison. In so doing, our findings provide a platform for further considering how management accounting researchers, and management accounting as a discipline might, in the spirit of this study’s title, “Learn from the Experience of Others.”