Craig Fox, Effect of Behavioral Interventions on Inappropriate Antibiotic Prescribing Among Primary Care Practices
The overuse of antibiotics in primary care facilities is a chronic problem that contributes to millions of illnesses and deaths every year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Most antibiotics prescribed in the United States are for acute respiratory tract infections, but roughly half of these prescriptions are intended to treat diagnoses for which antibiotics have no benefit. Yet despite published clinical guidelines and decades of efforts to change prescribing patterns, antibiotic overuse persists. As part of a team including medical doctors, social psychologists and behavioral economists, Craig Fox – along with UCLA Anderson’s Noah Goldstein – examined how the use of behavioral science could reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Using three interventions designed to reduce the rate of unnecessary antibiotic prescribing, Fox and his colleagues used “nudges” to push doctors, nurses and other prescribers to reduce antibiotic prescriptions for illnesses that didn’t require them. The use of accountable justification and peer comparison resulted in lower rates of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing among primary care practices.
Read Article
Margaret Shih, Where Do Racism and Sexism Intersect at the Office?
While the U.S. currently has a black president and a woman just made history by clinching the Democratic presidential nomination, both racial minorities and women still face significant barriers in professional settings. Considering the parallels and differences in the biases that women and racial minorities face is an important way to increase our understanding of workplace discrimination and equality. By reviewing some recent work by cross-disciplinary researchers from across the world, Shih and research partner Serena Does attempted to shed light and theorize on some ways in which racial minorities might suffer from similar biases as those identified for women. For the sake of comprehension, they narrowed their scope to research on Asian Americans.
Read Article
Corinne Bendersky, The Downfall of Extraverts and Rise of Neurotics
Bendersky and Neha Parikh Shah advance previous research that has associated extraversion with high status and neuroticism with low status in newly formed task groups by examining how variations in personality affect status changes over time. By building on research that emphasizes the dark sides of extraversion and the bright sides of neuroticism, they challenge the persistence of extraverts’ advantage and neurotics’ disadvantage in task group status hierarchies. In a field and an experimental study, they find that extraversion is associated with status losses and disappointing expectations for contributions to group tasks and neuroticism is associated with status gains due to surpassing expectations for group-task contributions. Whereas personality may inform status expectations through perceptions of competence when groups first form, as group members work together interdependently over time, actual contributions to the group’s task are an important basis for reallocating status.
Read Article
Jenessa Shapiro, Selection BIAS: Stereotypes and Discrimination Related to Having a History of Cancer
Although great strides have been made in increasing equality and inclusion in organizations, a number of stigmatized groups are overlooked by diversity initiatives, including people with a history of cancer. To examine the workplace experiences of these individuals in selection contexts, Shapiro and co-authors conducted 3 complementary studies that assess the extent to which cancer is disclosed, the stereotypes associated with cancer in the workplace, and discrimination resulting from these stereotypes. In a pilot study, they surveyed 196 individuals with a history of cancer (across 2 samples) about their workplace disclosure habits. In Study 1, they explored stereotypes related to employees with a history of cancer using the framework outlined by the stereotype content model. In Study 2, they used a field study to assess the experiences of job applicants who indicated they were “cancer survivors” (vs. not) with both formal and interpersonal forms of discrimination. This research shows that cancer is disclosed at relatively high rates (pilot study), those with a history of cancer are stereotyped as being higher in warmth than competence (Study 1), and the stereotypes associated with those who have had cancer result in actual discrimination toward them (Study 2). They discuss the theory behind these findings and aim to inform both science and practice with respect to this growing workplace population.
Read Article
Samuel Culbert, Get Rid of the Performance Review!
The alleged primary purpose of performance reviews is to enlighten subordinates about what they should be doing better or differently. But Culbert sees the primary purpose quite differently. He sees it as intimidation aimed at preserving the boss’s authority and power advantage. Such intimidation is unnecessary, though: The boss has the power with or without the performance review.
Read Article
