Is Positive Self-Concept a Categorical Imperative? by Timothy A. Judge

Is Positive Self-Concept a Categorical Imperative?:

Implications of Core Self-Evaluationsfor Employers and Employees

Timothy A. JudgeUniversity of Florida, USA

Workshop on Research Advances in Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Management

University of Toulouse, France

18 May 2009

22

Positivity in Society

• Positivity is valued in Western society– Positive psychology movement

• Centers (e.g., UM), journals (Journal of Positive Psychology; Journal of Happiness Studies), conferences, awards, books, etc.

– Happiness is to some a natural right (or goal)• Pursuit of happiness a right in Declaration of

Independence – Is positivity particularly American?

33

Positivity in Society

• Why is positivity so desirable?– Is it true?– If so, where is origin?

• Evolution?• Culture?

• Regardless of reasons…– Positivity, for most, is socially desirable– So, self-positivity is also desirable

44

Self-Positivity

• Self-positivity = categorical imperative?– Act only according to that maxim by which you

can at the same time will that it should become a universal law (Kant)

• From Elizabeth Anscombe (1958):– virtue ethic refocuses moral philosophy from

“what is right?” to “how should I live?”• Universal virtue ethic: everyone should live this way

• Should all have a positive self-concept?

55

Should All Be Self-Positive?

• Quality of life– Subjective and physical (health) well-being– Employment– Societal (prosocial [+], deviant [-])

• Ecological generalization– Does what applies to the individual necessarily

apply to society?

• Philosophy aside, focus here on central self-positive trait: core self-evaluations

66

Core Self-Evaluations

• Core self-evaluations (CSE) are individuals’ fundamental evaluations of their worthiness and competence (to perform, cope, persevere, and succeed)

• Indicated by at least four traits: self-esteem, locus of control, generalized self-efficacy, and emotional stability

• CSE is broad factor that causes these measures to be correlated

77

Measure of CSE

• One can measure CSE as latent factor indicated by individual core traits, or

• Use direct measure: Core Self-Evaluations Scale (CSES)

I am confident I get the success I deserve in life. Sometimes I feel depressed. (r)

When I try, I generally succeed. Sometimes when I fail I feel worthless. (r)

Sometimes, I do not feel in control of my work. (r) I complete tasks successfully.

I am filled with doubts about my competence. (r) Overall, I am satisfied with myself.

I do not feel in control of my success in my career. (r) I determine what will happen in my life.

I am capable of coping with most of my problems. There are times when things look pretty bleak and hopeless to me. (r)

Source: Judge, Erez, Bono, & Thoresen (PPsych, 2003)

88

Origins and Outcomes

• What causes CSE?– Genetics– General mental ability– Attractiveness

• Like all traits, there are probably state and trait qualities to CSE– Personality change: Both long-term (Roberts)

and short-term variation (Fleeson)

99

Genetic Source of CSE

• No previous studies of CSE heritability

• We (Judge & Ilies, under review) studied heritability of CSE using Swedish twins

• Heritability of CSE = .42 (42% genetic)– Heritability unaffected by controlling for

whether twins were raised apart or together– Heritability about the same as that for Big Five

traits

1010

Genetic Source of CSEMonozygotic

(identical) twinsDizygotic

(fraternal) twins

r12 N(twins) r12 N(twins)

CSE .45 113 .19 181

Job satisfaction .33 65 .18 109

Work stress .33 61 .07 103

Note: r12=correlation between Twin 1 and Twin 2.

Source: Judge & Ilies (under review)

**

**

**

*

1111

Control for Shared EnvironmentMonozygotic

(identical) twinsDizygotic

(fraternal) twins

r12 N(twins) r12 N(twins)

CSE .44 113 .18 181

Job satisfaction .33 65 .18 109

Work stress .33 61 .07 103

Note: r12=correlation between Twin 1 and Twin 2.

Source: Judge & Ilies (under review)

**

**

**

*

1212

Role of Brains and Beauty

• CSE has been solely conceptualized as a trait, which presumably is exogenous– But best indicator of CSE is self-esteem,

which is often studied as dependent variable

• Investigated degree to which general mental ability, physical attractiveness, education, and CSE predict success– GMA assessed by battery of tests,

attractiveness from ratings of photosSource: Judge, Hurst, & Simon (in press, JAP)

1313

Role of Brains and Beauty

Source: Judge, Hurst, & Simon (in press, JAP)


GeneralMentalAbility

PhysicalAttractiveness

EducationalAttainment

Income(Time 2)

Financial Strains(Time 3)

Demographics(Age, Race, Sex)

.51**

.23**

.21**

.19**

.41**

.24**

.13*

.18**

.23**

-.31**

-.26**

1414


• What does CSE cause?– Job satisfaction– Job performance– Stressors (-), stress (-), strain (-), and coping

(+)– Career success trajectories– Receipt of OCBs (+) and CWBs (-) from

others

1515

Job Satisfaction

• Individuals with positive CSE have higher levels of job satisfaction

• Why?– Subjective perceptions of intrinsic job

characteristics (Judge, Locke, Durham, & Kluger, JAP, 1998)

– Objective qualities of jobs attained (Judge, Bono,

& Locke, JAP, 2000): High CSE people occupy more complex jobs

1616

Job Performance

• Core self-evaluations predicts performance– Individual core traits (Judge & Bono, JAP, 2001)

– Overall CSES (Judge et al., PPsych, 2003)

• Why?– Individuals with positive CSE set higher goals

and are more committed to them (Erez & Judge, JAP, 2001)

1717

JobPerformance• This shows that

very few high-CSES individuals are below-average performers, and very few low-CSES individuals are above-average performers

Source: Judge (Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2009)

1818

Stressors

Source: Judge, Woolf, Schilpzand, and Hurst (in preparation)

-.59

-.43

-.38 -.39

-.12

-.17 -.16

-.28

-.75

-.60

-.45

-.30

-.15

.00

SE GSE LOC N

Ro

le A

mb

igu

ity

There is insufficientresearch linkingCSES to stressors,stress, and strain.

In this study wemeta-analyzed linkbetween each coretrait and stressors(here, role ambig-uity).

How do resultsinform?

1919

Stress


-.63

-.49

-.29

-.44

-.48

-.23

-.17

-.10

-.75

-.60

-.45

-.30

-.15

.00

SE GSE LOC N

Glo

bal

Str

ess


In this study wemeta-analyzed linkbetween each coretrait and globalstress measures.


Black square – mean estimate

Grey bars – upper and lower valuesof 95% confidence interval

2020

Strain



In this study wemeta-analyzed linkbetween each coretrait and strain(here, burnout)


-.77

-.62

-.40

-.88

-.24 -.26

-.14

-.26

-1.00

-.85

-.70

-.55

-.40

-.25

-.10

SE GSE LOC N

Bu

rno

ut

Black square – mean estimate

Grey bars – upper and lower valuesof 95% confidence interval

2121

Coping

Source: Kammeyer-Mueller, Judge, & Scott (JAP, 2009)

2222

Career Success Trajectories

95010

115788

32678

40469

30,000

60,000

90,000

120,000

19

79

19

81

19

83

19

85

19

87

19

89

19

91

19

93

19

96

20

00

20

04

Low CSE

High CSE

Source: Judge and Hurst (JAP, 2008)

Careers (in form of pay[shown here], occup-ational prestige, jobsatisfaction, and careerSatisfaction) ascendmore rapidly with thepassage of time for thosewith high CSE (+1 SD)than those with low CSE(-1 SD).

Over 25 years, pay gapincreases from $7,791 to$20,778.

2323

Receipt of OCBs and CWBs

Core Self-Evaluationsof Employee†

EmployeePopularity‡

OrganizationalCitizenship

Behaviors Receivedby Employee

† As rated by employee’s significant other. ‡ As rated by employee’s co-workers.

Source: Scott & Judge (JAP, 2008)

CounterproductiveBehaviors Received

by Employee

Communication NetworkCentrality of Employee

.27*

.38*

.28*

-.18

.32*

-.06

-.30*

2424


• Does Context Moderate Outcomes of CSE?– Favorability of early life circumstances– Favorability of work environment– Culture– Job characteristics– Others?

2525

Favorability of Early Life

$90,758

$51,544

$43,861$37,836

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

$90,000

$100,000

8 years 10 years 12 years 14 years

High CSE

Low CSE

Predicted Income 1994-2002

Parents’ Education in 1979

High CSEpeople profitmore fromparents beinghighly educated

Source: Judge & Hurst (JAP, 2007)

2626

Favorability of Early Life

$103,297

$54,636

$44,135$38,703

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

15 30 45 60 75

High CSE

Low CSE

Predicted Income 1994-2002

Parents’ Occupational Prestige 1979

Roofer Carpenter Musician Therapist Economist Waiter Plumber Nurse(RN) Manager Chemist

High CSEpeople profitmore fromparents’ occ.prestige

Source: Judge & Hurst (JAP, 2007)

2727

Favorability of Environment

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

Low High


Ove

rall

Per

form

ance

High LeaderEffectiveness

Low LeaderEffectiveness

CSE more positivelyrelated to performancewhen individuals workunder effective leaders

Source: Kacmar, Collins, Harris, and Judge (under review)

2828

Favorability of Environment

3.25

3.50

3.75

4.00

4.25

Low High


Ov

era

ll P

erf

orm

an

ce

High IntrinsicSatisfactionLow IntrinsicSatisfaction

CSE was more positivelyrelated to performancewhen individuals hadhigh levels of intrinsicjob satisfaction

Source: Kacmar, Collins, Harris, and Judge (under review)

2929

Culture

3.50

3.70

3.90

4.10

4.30

4.50

4.70

Low (-1SD) Average High (+1SD)

Collectivism

Job

Sat

isfa

ctio

n

Low CSEHigh CSE

Collectivism was associated with higher job satisfaction moresofor high CSE people

Sample of 269employees oflarge electronicscompany in PRC

Source: Judge & Sun (in preparation)

3030

Culture

5.25

5.50

5.75

6.00

Low (-1SD) Average High (+1SD)

Collectivism

Cit

izen

ship

Beh

avio

r

Low CSEHigh CSE

Collectivism was associated with higher levels of OCBs only forhigh CSE people

Sample of 269employees oflarge electronicscompany in PRC

Source: Judge & Sun (in preparation)

3131

Emerging Areas

• State and trait– Focus on intra-individual variation in CSE

(why and how our state CSE fluctuates)

• Costs and limits– Self-verification– Affective forecasting (are high CSE individuals

more biased?)– Trait paradoxes

3232

State and Trait

400

650

900

1150

1400

Low HighState Core Self-Evaluations

(Time T-1)

Ear

nin

gs/

Mo

nth

(£)

(Tim

e T

)

Low Trait CSE

High Trait CSE

Source: Judge & Klinger (in preparation)

People with high traitCSE earned more

State CSE positivelypredicted incomethe following year…

But only for thosewith low trait CSE

3333

State and Trait

0.00

0.03

0.06

0.09

0.12

Low HighState Core Self-Evaluations

(Time T-1)

Un

emp

loym

ent

Sta

tus

(Tim

e T

)

Low Trait CSE

High Trait CSE

People who had lowertrait CSE had higherunemployment rates

State CSE led to lowerunemployment rates inthe following year

State CSE was morestrongly linked to lowerunemployment rates forlow trait CSE people

Source: Judge & Klinger (in preparation)

3434

Costs and Limits

• “All traits have bright and dark sides, and carry with them evolutionary paradoxes that are often not imagined until revealed”– Judge and Piccolo (Leadership Quarterly, under revision)

• “A fruitful way of looking at variation is in terms of trade-offs of different fitness benefits and costs” – Nettle (American Psychologist, 2006)

• CSE is certain to have dark side

3535

Costs and Limits

What Do These Species Have in Common?

3636

Costs and Limits

Notes: Estimates are βs. N=164. † p < .10. * p < .05. ** p < .01.

Source: Erez and Judge (in preparation)

Overall Job Performance

Contextual Performance

Task Performance

Neuroticism .16 .31** .20*

Extraversion .05 -.02 .05Openness -.07 -.07 -.11Agreeableness -.05 .13 -.07Conscientiousness .16† .06 .23**

Core self-evaluations

.32** .39** .28**

3737

Costs and Limits

• CSE doesn’t appear to be same as narcissism (r=+.21) and effects appear to be different

Turnover

in ten tion

Pe rson-

environm en t

fit

Pe rson-

job

fit

B urnout

A ffe ctive

com m itm e nt

O rgan izat ional

iden tific ation

Perceived

o rgan iza tional

support P ro testan t w ork eth ic - .18* * .23 * * .09† .00 .28* * .19 ** .14 * N arc issism .12* -.07 -.05 .15* * - .04 -.08 -.08 C ore self -evaluat ions - .37* * .37 * * .41* * - .49* * .31* * .34 ** .32 * * R .41* * .43 * * .41* * .48* * .42* * .39 ** .34 * * R 2 .17* * .19 * * .17* * .23* * .17* * .15 ** .12 * *

Source: Judge, Sun, and Rode (in preparation)

3838

Costs and Limits

75

25

45

55

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

FavorableEvaluation

UnfavorableEvaluation

Per

cen

tag

e C

ho

osi

ng

Inte

ract

ion

P

artn

er

Positive Self-Concept

Negative Self-Concept

Source: Judge, Cable, and Klinger (in progress)

High CSE people aremuch more likely tochose an interactionpartner who will givethem positive feedback

3939

Conclusion

• So, is core self-evaluations a categorical imperative or universal virtue ethic?

• The answer is no; however…– There are many benefits to positive CSE– As for all traits, validities are moderate

• “There is a complexity to human affairs before which science and analysis simply stands mute”

– David Brooks, New York Times (5.12.09)

Thank you!

All published and in press papers, and copies of these slides, available at:

http://www.ufstudies.net/tim/VITA/index.htm

Questions?

Documents

Is Positive Self-Concept a Categorical Imperative? by Timothy A. Judge