PSYCH 11: REPORTING

Group 1MWF 5:30 – 6:30

Rm. 401

Hawthorne’s Studies

Background

During the early part of the century, American businesses were swept by Scientific Management, a school of thought largely developed by Frederick Taylor. He pioneered the use of time and motion studies, in which management would carefully break down tasks into simple chunks, then work out the best way for a worker to execute the chunks (all the way down to how long a step to take, how often to break, how much water to drink, etc.). The worker then executed their jobs exactly as they were told, like automatons.

Hawthorne’s Studies

Background (continued)

As part of the Scientific Management regime, companies routinely studied the effects of the physical environment on their workers. For example, they varied the lighting to find the optimum level of light for maximum productivity. They piped in music, varied the temperature, tried different compensation schemes, adjusted the number of working hours in a day, etc.

The Hawthorne studies were carried out by the Western Electric company at their Hawthorne plant in the 1920's. Initially, the study focused on lighting.

The studies were intended to examine the influence of environmental variables on a group of production workers. The group of workers was divided into two subgroups: a test group, which would undergo environmental changes, and a control group. The members of the control group would work under normal, constant environment conditions. 

Hawthorne’s Studies

Background (continued)

The researchers began by manipulating the lighting of the test group. When lighting for the test group was increased, their productivity increased--but the productivity of the control group increased, as well. This result was somewhat unexpected, since the lighting at the workstations of the control group had not been altered. 

The researchers then decreased the lighting at the test group’s workstations. Surprisingly, both the test group and the control group continued to improve their productivity. There were no decreases in productivity until the light was reduced to the point where the workers could barely see. The researchers concluded that light did not have a significant impact on the motivation of production workers. This led General Electric, a light bulb manufacturer, to withdraw their funding. 

Hawthorne’s Studies

Background (continued)

The next experiment utilized a mainstay of scientific management: incentive-based, piecework system. The researchers expected, according to the conventional wisdom of the day, that this would inspire the employees to dramatically increase their pace. However, rather than working as fast as they could individually, the workers calibrated themselves as a group.

Employees who worked more slowly than average were derided as “chiselers.” Employees who attempted to work faster than the group were called “rate busters.” In other words, any significant deviation from the collectively imposed norm was punished. 

The Hawthorne studies drew attention to the social needs as an additional source of motivation. Taylor’s emphasis on economic incentives was not wholly discredited, but economic incentives were now viewed as one factor--not the sole factor--to which employees responded.

Hawthorne Effects

A term referring to the tendency of some people to work harder and perform better when they are participants in an experiment. Individuals may change their behavior due to the attention they are receiving from researchers rather than because of any manipulation of independent variables.

Individual behaviors may be altered by the study itself, rather than the effects the study is researching was demonstrated in a research project (1927 - 1932) of the Hawthorne plant of the Western Electric Company in Cicero, Illinois. This series of research, first led by Harvard Business School professor Elton Mayo along with associates F. J. Roethlisberger and William J. Dickson started out by examining the physical and environmental influences of the workplace (e.g. brightness of lights, humidity) and later, moved into the psychological aspects (e.g. breaks, group pressure, working hours, managerial leadership).

Hawthorne Effects (continued)

The ideas that this team developed about the social dynamics of groups in the work setting had lasting influence — the collection of data, labor-management relations, and informal interaction among factory employees.

The major finding of the study was that almost regardless of the experimental manipulation employed, the production of the workers seemed to improve. One reasonable conclusion is that the workers were pleased to receive attention from the researchers who expressed an interest in them. The study was only expected to last one year, but because the researchers were set back each time they tried to relate the manipulated physical conditions to the worker's efficiency, the project extended out to five years.

Hawthorne Effects (continued)

Four general conclusions were drawn from the Hawthorne studies:

The aptitudes of individuals are imperfect predictors of job performance. Although they give some indication of the physical and mental potential of the individual, the amount produced is strongly influenced by social factors.

Informal organization affects productivity. The Hawthorne researchers discovered a group life among the workers. The studies also showed that the relations that supervisors develop with workers tend to influence the manner in which the workers carry out directives.

Work-group norms affect productivity. The Hawthorne researchers were not the first to recognize that work groups tend to arrive at norms of what is a fair day's work; however, they provided the best systematic description and interpretation of this phenomenon.

The workplace is a social system. The Hawthorne researchers came to view the workplace as a social system made up of interdependent parts.

Elton Mayo

Elton Mayo’s team conducted a number of experiments involving six female workers. These experiments are often referred to as the Hawthorne experiments or Hawthorne studies as they took place at The Hawthorne Works of the Western Electric Company in Chicago.

Over the course of five years, Mayo’s team altered the female worker’s working conditions and then monitored how the working conditions affected the workers morale and productivity. The changes in working conditions included changes in working hours, rest brakes, lighting, humidity, and temperature. The changes were explained to the workers prior to implementation.

Elton Mayo

At the end of the five year period, the female worker’s working conditions, reverted back to the conditions before the experiment began. Unexpectedly the workers morale and productivity rose to levels higher than before and during the experiments.

The combination of results during and after the experiment (ie the increase in the workers productivity when they were returned to their original working conditions) led Mayo to conclude that workers were motivated by psychological conditions more than physical working condition. He also concluded that workers were motivated by more than self interest and instead the following applied:

There is an unwritten understanding between the worker and employer regarding what is expected from them; Mayo called this the psychological contract.

  A worker’s motivation can be increased by showing an interest in them.

Mayo classified studying the workers (through the experiments) as showing an interest in the workers.

 

Elton Mayo

Work is a group activity, team work can increase a worker’s motivation as it allows people to form strong working relationships and increases trust between the workers. Work groups are created formally by the employer but also occur informally. Both informal and formal groups should be used to increase productivity as informal groups influence the worker’s habits and attitudes.

Workers are motivated by the social aspect of work, as demonstrated by the female workers socialising during and outside work and the subsequent increase in motivation.

  Workers are motivated by recognition, security and a sense of

belonging.   The communication between workers and management influences

workers’ morale and productivity. Workers are motivated through a good working relationship with management.

Between the Wars: During and Shortly After the Hawthorne Studies

Major advances in measurement of attitudes during 1920's and 1930's◦ Likert and Thurstone among those particularly prominent

One of the earliest with clinical roots to enter I/O psychology was Morris Viteles◦ Viteles was student of Lightner Witmer (who many consider the father of

clinical psych)◦ Among Viteles' books were:

Industrial Psychology (1932) (perhaps first book to use that term in its title) The Science of Work (1934) Motivation and Morale in Industry (1953)

In 1939, Kurt Lewin led the first publication of an empirical study of the effects of leadership styles; this work initiated arguments for the use of participative management techniques

Likert and Thustone

Likert and Thustone

LIKERT:

The Likert scale is named after its originator, Rensis Likert.

A benefit is that questions used are usually easy to understand and so lead to consistent answers. A disadvantage is that only a few options are offered, with which respondents may not fully agree.

As with any other measurement, the options should be a carefully selected set of questions or statements that act together to give a useful and coherent picture.

A problem can occur where people may become influenced by the way they have answered previous questions. For example if they have agreed several times in a row, they may continue to agree. They may also deliberately break the pattern, disagreeing with a statement with which they might otherwise have agreed. This patterning can be broken up by asking reversal questions, where the sense of of the question is reversed - thus in the example above, a reversal might be 'I do not like going to Chinese restaurants'. Sometimes the 'do not' is emphasized, to ensure people notice it, although this can cause bias and hence needs great care.

Likert and Thustone

LIKERT:

◦ The Likert Scale is an ordered, one-dimensional scale from which respondents choose one option that best aligns with their view.

◦ There are typically between four and seven options. Five is very common (see arguments about this below).

◦ All options usually have labels, although sometimes only a few are offered and the others are implied.

◦ A common form is an assertion, with which the person may agree or disagree to varying degrees.

◦ In scoring, numbers are usually assigned to each option (such as 1 to 5).

◦ The Likert scale is also called the summative scale, as the result of a questionnaire is often achieved by summing numerical assignments to the responses given.

Likert and Thustone

LIKERT: (examples) 5-point traditional likert scale:

5-point Likert-type scale, not all labeled:

6-point Likert-type scale:

Strongly Agree

Tend to Agree

Neutral Tend to Disagree

Strongly Disagree

I like going to Chinese restaurants

Good - Neutral - Bad

When I think about Chinese restaurants I feel

Never Infrequently Seldom Sometimes Frequently Always

I feel happy when entering a Chinese Restaurant

Likert and Thustone

LIKERT: Question selection

Questions may be selected by a mathematical process, as follows:

◦ Generate a lot of questions -- more than you need.

◦ Get a group of judges to score the questionnaire.

◦ Sum the scores for all items.

◦ Calculate the intercorrelations between all pairs of items.

◦ Reject questions that have a low correlation with the sum of the scores.

◦ For each item, calculate the t-value for the top quarter and bottom quarter of the judges and reject questions with lower t-values (higher t-values show questions with higher discrimination).

Likert and Thustone

THURSTONE:

◦ Thurstone was one of the first and most productive scaling theorists. He actually invented three different methods for developing a unidimensional scale:

the method of equal-appearing intervals

the method of successive intervals

the method of paired comparisons.

The three methods differed in how the scale values for items were constructed, but in all three cases, the resulting scale was rated the same way by respondents.

Likert and Thustone

THURSTONE:

Judges are used beforehand to understand variation -- if the judge cannot agree, then the question as posed is also likely to result in varied responses from target people.

One of the biggest problem with Thurstone scaling is to find sufficient judges who have a good enough understanding of the concept being assessed.

With a set of questions with which you can agree or not, it is useful to have some questions with which the respondent will easily agree, some with which they will easily disagree and some which they have to think about, and where some people are more likely to make one choice rather than another. This should then give a realistic and varying distribution across all questions, rather than bias being caused by questions that are likely to give all of one type of answer.

Thurstone scaling is also called Equal-Appearing Interval Scaling.

Likert and Thustone

THURSTONE: (example)

Agree Disagree

I like going to Chinese restaurants

Chinese restaurants provide good value for money

There are one or more Chinese restaurants near where I live

I only go to restaurants with others (never alone)

Likert and Thustone

THURSTONE: Question Selection

Equal-appearing intervals◦ Generate a large set of possible statements.◦ Get a set of judges to rate the statements in terms of how much they agree with

them, from 1 (agree least) to 11 (agree most).◦ For each statement, plot a histogram of the numbers against which the different

judges scored it.◦ For each statement, identify the median score, the number below 25% (Q1) and

below 75% (Q3). The difference between these is the interquartile range.◦ Sort the list by median value (This is the 'common' score in terms of agreement).◦ Select a set of statements that are are equal positions across the range of

medians. Choose the one with the lowest interquartile range for each position.

Successive intervals   Paired comparisons

◦ In this method, the judges select between every possible pair of potential statements. As the number of comparisons increases with the square of the number of statements, this is only practical when there is a limited number of statements.

Morris Viteles

Morris Viteles

During the 1930s, Mr. Viteles, considered by specialists to be the father of industrial psychology - now called consultative psychology-practice - was known for developing tests to help managers in industry match workers and jobs.

One of the tests, for applicants for jobs operating electric power stations, was designed to enable Philadelphia Electric Co. to find workers who would not lose control when confronted with electrical emergencies.

During what appeared to be a routine test to show that the applicant could do simple operations, a 10,000-volt charge of electricity would suddenly crackle across the panel in front of the candidate. Some applicants stuck by the task and continued to throw switches. Others bolted.

By selecting those who kept their cool, the company reduced human errors that led to substation failures from 36 a year to 5 a year.

Morris Viteles

Mr. Viteles, who held a staff position at Philadelphia Electric Co., where he was responsible for personnel research and training, also devised tests to match employees to other jobs. In 1941, the program he developed was considered one of the most advanced in the country.

He also designed tests to ferret out the best trolley operators, clerks, typists, stenographers, salesmen, and other workers for other companies.

A test he devised for Yellow Cab to find people who would enjoy driving hacks was so successful that Philadelphia cabbies stayed on the job for an average of 10 years, about 10 times longer than drivers in other cities, according to a magazine report in 1942.

``It is important . . . that a man be kept out of a job for which he is not fitted,'' Mr. Viteles said when asked about his research. ``It is more important . . . that he be placed in a job where he can be efficient and happy.''

Kurt Lewin

Kurt Lewin

led the first publication of an empirical study of the effects of leadership styles; this work initiated arguments for the use of participative management techniques in 1939.

  While further research has identified more specific types of leadership, this early study

was very influential and established three major leadership styles.

Authoritarian Leadership (Autocratic):

Authoritarian leaders, also known as autocratic leaders, provide clear expectations for what needs to be done, when it should be done, and how it should be done. There is also a clear division between the leader and the followers. Authoritarian leaders make decisions independently with little or no input from the rest of the group.

Researchers found that decision-making was less creative under authoritarian leadership. Lewin also found that it is more difficult to move from an authoritarian style to a democratic style than vice versa. Abuse of this style is usually viewed as controlling, bossy, and dictatorial.

Authoritarian leadership is best applied to situations where there is little time for group decision-making or where the leader is the most knowledgeable member of the group.

Kurt Lewin

Participative Leadership (Democratic)

Lewin’s study found that participative leadership, also known as democratic leadership, is generally the most effective leadership style. Democratic leaders offer guidance to group members, but they also participate in the group and allow input from other group members. In Lewin’s study, children in this group were less productive than the members of the authoritarian group, but their contributions were of a much higher quality.

Participative leaders encourage group members to participate, but retain the final say over the decision-making process. Group members feel engaged in the process and are more motivated and creative.

Kurt Lewin

Delegative (Laissez-Faire) Leadership

Researchers found that children under delegative leadership, also known as laissez-fair leadership, were the least productive of all three groups. The children in this group also made more demands on the leader, showed little cooperation and were unable to work independently.

Delegative leaders offer little or no guidance to group members and leave decision-making up to group members. While this style can be effective in situations where group members are highly qualified in an area of expertise, it often leads to poorly defined roles and a lack of motivation.