Always Looking on the Bright Side: Is There a Positivity Bias in Research on Job Performance Antecedents?
Saved in:
| Title: | Always Looking on the Bright Side: Is There a Positivity Bias in Research on Job Performance Antecedents? |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Walker, Benjamin W.1 (AUTHOR) ben.walker@vuw.ac.nz, Criado‐Perez, Christian2 (AUTHOR), Helldén, Ludvig3 (AUTHOR), Meachen, Ryan1 (AUTHOR), Kimpton, Rebecca1 (AUTHOR), Ryburn, Gray1 (AUTHOR), Kane, Sophie1 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Personnel Psychology. Dec2025, Vol. 78 Issue 4, p571-593. 23p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Job performance, *Self-evaluation, Organizational behavior, Psychological factors, Negativity bias, Empirical research |
| Abstract: | Job performance is among the most commonly studied outcomes in the field of organizational behavior. While this volume of research has produced valuable insights into the antecedents of job performance, in this article, we explore whether a barrier to more sophisticated insights is a "positivity bias" in this literature: a systematic tendency to overemphasize highly positive psychological antecedents when studying favorable performance outcomes. Any such bias would yield a body of evidence on job performance that over‐evidences the impact of its "brightest" antecedents, and under‐evidences the impact of its less positive or even "darker" ones. We tested for a positivity bias in the job performance literature by comparing results of three studies: an analysis of over 20 years of hypothesizing on job performance across 10 leading journals (Study 1), and two studies of workers' subjective accounts of the psychological antecedents of typical performance (Study 2) and maximum performance (Study 3). Our results provide initial evidence of a positivity bias in research on job performance antecedents (at least if the reference point is workers' own accounts of favorable performance), suggesting a need for researchers to engage with a broader range of less positive antecedents in future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Personnel Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Job performance is among the most commonly studied outcomes in the field of organizational behavior. While this volume of research has produced valuable insights into the antecedents of job performance, in this article, we explore whether a barrier to more sophisticated insights is a "positivity bias" in this literature: a systematic tendency to overemphasize highly positive psychological antecedents when studying favorable performance outcomes. Any such bias would yield a body of evidence on job performance that over‐evidences the impact of its "brightest" antecedents, and under‐evidences the impact of its less positive or even "darker" ones. We tested for a positivity bias in the job performance literature by comparing results of three studies: an analysis of over 20 years of hypothesizing on job performance across 10 leading journals (Study 1), and two studies of workers' subjective accounts of the psychological antecedents of typical performance (Study 2) and maximum performance (Study 3). Our results provide initial evidence of a positivity bias in research on job performance antecedents (at least if the reference point is workers' own accounts of favorable performance), suggesting a need for researchers to engage with a broader range of less positive antecedents in future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00315826 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/peps.12687 |
