Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T16:03:37.972Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Basic income, cognitive capacity, and the workplace: The role of I-O psychology in the interdisciplinary research agenda to reduce poverty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 December 2021

Julie B. Olson-Buchanan  and
David R. Vera
Julie B. Olson-Buchanan*
Affiliation:
Department of Management, California State University, Fresno
David R. Vera
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, California State University, Fresno
*
*Corresponding author. Email: julieo@csufresno.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , December 2021 , pp. 573 - 576
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahmed, S., Hoffman, A. J., Mullins, M., & Sywulak, L. (2017). Partnering against poverty: Fighting POSH bias through increased interdisciplinary research and practice. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 10(3), 379–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dilchert, S., Ones, D. S., Davis, R. D., & Rostow, C. D. (2007). Cognitive ability predicts objectively measured counterproductive work behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 616.10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.616CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gloss, A., Carr, S. C., Reichman, W., Abdul-Nasiru, I., & Oestereich, W. T. (2017). From handmaidens to POSH humanitarians: The case for making human capabilities the business of I-O psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 10(3), 329–369.10.1017/iop.2017.27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez-Mulé, E., Mount, M. K., & Oh, I. S. (2014). A meta-analysis of the relationship between general mental ability and nontask performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(6), 1222.10.1037/a0037547CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hüffmeier, J., & Zacher, H. (2021). The basic income: Initiating the needed discussion in industrial, work, and organizational psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 14(4), 531–562.Google Scholar
Mani, A., Mullainathan, S., Shafir, E., & Zhao, J. (2013). Poverty impedes cognitive function. Science, 341(6149), 976–980.10.1126/science.1238041CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olson-Buchanan, J., & Allen, T. (2017). STRETCH goals for I-O psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 10(3), 370–376. doi: 10.1017/iop.2017.28 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson-Buchanan, J. B., Bryan, L. L. K., & Thompson, L. F. (Eds.). (2013). Using industrial-organizational psychology for the greater good: Helping those who help others. Routledge.10.4324/9780203069264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: Occupational attainment and job performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 162–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.162 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
West, S., Castro Baker, A., Samra, S. & Coltrera, E. (2021). Preliminary analysis: SEED’s first year. www.stocktondemonstration.org Google Scholar
World Economic Forum. (2020). The future of jobs report 2020. http://www3.weforum.org Google Scholar
Ziegler, M., Dietl, E., Danay, E., Vogel, M., & Bühner, M. (2011). Predicting training success with general mental ability, specific ability tests, and (un)structured interviews: Ameta-analysis with unique samples. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19(2), 170–182.10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00544.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar