Age effects on perceived personality and job

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0268-3946.htm

Age effects on perceived personality and job performance

Perceived personality and job performance

Marilena Bertolino Department of Cognitive and Education Sciences, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy

Donald M. Truxillo Department of Psychology, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA, and

867 Received July 2011 Revised December 2011 Accepted February 2012

Franco Fraccaroli Department of Cognitive and Education Sciences, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy Abstract Purpose – This paper aimed to investigate how older and younger workers are perceived in terms of Big Five personality and task and contextual performance. Based on the intergroup bias phenomenon, the authors also examined whether respondent age would moderate these effects. Design/methodology/approach – Participants (n ¼ 155) completed a paper survey in which they were randomly assigned to rate either a “typical” younger employee or a “typical” older employee. They filled out questionnaires containing measures of perceived personality factors and perceived job performance of an older or younger worker. Findings – As predicted, older and younger workers were perceived differently in terms of certain Big Five personality factors and organizational citizenship behavior. These perceived differences generally reflected actual age-related differences on these variables. However, respondents’ age moderated many of these effects, such that respondents’ perceptions favored their own age group. Research limitations/implications – These studies illustrate that dimensions such as perceived Big Five personality and job performance may be useful for examining workplace age stereotypes. They also illustrate that respondent age may affect these perceptions of older and younger workers. Originality/value – This study goes beyond previous studies focused on the examination of general age bias. Indeed, this is the first study that examines perceptions of personality and performance dimensions of older and younger workers in a field setting. Such perceptions may have an impact on the decisions that managers make regarding older and younger workers (e.g. selection, promotions). Keywords Job performance, Aging, Stereotypes, Personality Paper type Research paper

The authors thank Dirk Steiner and Jenn Rineer for their helpful comments on this paper. The authors also acknowledge their Master’s students for their help in data collection. This research was funded by Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Universita` e della Ricerca (MIUR), Programmi di Ricerca Scientifica di Rilevante Interesse Nazionale (PRIN), 2006, prot. 2006119348_003. Marilena Bertolino’s term at the University of Trento was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from the Municipality of Rovereto (2006-2008).

Journal of Managerial Psychology Vol. 28 No. 7/8, pp. 867-885 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0268-3946 DOI 10.1108/JMP-07-2013-0222

JMP 28,7/8

868

Projections estimate that by 2050, the population of older workers (55-64) in Europe will grow to 60 percent (Carone and Costello, 2006). Similarly, in the USA, the number of people over 55 will increase by 73 percent by 2020, and the number of younger workers will grow by 5 percent (Arthur, 2006). Further, the recent economic downturn has increased the workforce participation of older persons in the USA and led to calls to raise the retirement age in many industrialized countries. In short, the workforce will be more diverse in terms of age, and older and younger people are more likely to interact in the workplace. Thus, it is important to examine the stereotypes they hold of each other. Stereotypes are the result of associations between attributes (e.g. personality characteristics, behaviors) and social categories (e.g. gender, age groups, types of job). The role of stereotypes in the workplace is relevant because stereotypes can influence work decisions. Indeed, decision-makers with unfavorable stereotypes about a group make unfavorable attributions about group members (Hewstone and Jaspars, 1982). For example, age stereotypes can influence hiring decisions (Perry et al., 1996). However, younger workers face negative stereotypes as well (Posthuma and Campion, 2009). For example, younger workers may be perceived as less emotionally stable (e.g. Gibson et al., 1993). Therefore, understanding how older and younger workers are perceived may help to explain the decisions that managers make about people in different age groups, and how they are treated by coworkers. Two relevant work-related dimensions on which people may base their perceptions or stereotypes about older and younger people are their personality (e.g. Wood and Roberts, 2006) and their performance at work. Research suggests that the Five Factor Model of personality (the FFM; the “Big Five”) relates to a range of workplace outcomes such as work performance (e.g. Barrick and Mount, 1991) and work attitudes ( Judge et al., 2002). Meta-analytic research has also found that the FFM dimensions may change across the lifespan (Roberts et al., 2006). For example, conscientiousness appears to increase during early adulthood, while openness to experience decreases after age 50 (Roberts et al., 2006). Given the relationship of the FFM to work performance and attitudes, and that the FFM may change as people age, it would be useful to see if older and younger workers are also perceived differently in terms of the FFM. To date, no research has examined how older and younger workers are perceived in terms of the FFM (cf. Wood and Roberts, 2006). In addition, there has been scant attention given to how older and younger workers are perceived in terms of job performance, frequently modeled as task and contextual performance (Motowidlo and Van Scotter, 1994). This is important because older and younger workers have been found to actually differ in terms of contextual performance dimensions (Ng and Feldman, 2008). The present paper advances the research on age stereotyping by examining perceptions of older and younger workers in terms of the FFM and task and contextual performance. Specifically, we examined whether workers in different age groups are perceived differently in terms of the FFM dimensions. We further examined whether there might also be perceived differences in the task and contextual performance of older and younger workers. We expected that younger workers would be perceived more positively in terms of some variables (e.g. extraversion) while older workers would be perceived more positively in terms of others (e.g. conscientiousness),

reflecting actual age differences across the lifespan (e.g. Roberts et al., 2006). We also expected that, based on the intergroup bias phenomenon (Hewstone et al., 2002), raters’ age would moderate these perceptions of older and younger workers. Perceptions of older and younger workers Over the last 40 years, researchers have examined age stereotypes in the workplace. Some stereotypes about older workers are that they are less creative, less flexible, more resistant to change, and uninterested in training (Posthuma and Campion, 2009; Warr, 1994, 2001). Meta-analytic evidence shows that older workers face bias in terms of perceived job qualifications and potential for development, and this may lead to negative decisions about them (Finkelstein et al., 1995; Gordon and Arvey, 2004). But these negative stereotypes of older workers are inconsistent with their actual work performance, which may be similar to, or even higher than that of younger workers (e.g. safety performance, organizational citizenship behavior; Ng and Feldman, 2008). Further, stereotypes about older workers are not always negative (Posthuma and Campion, 2009), In fact, older workers are perceived more positively than younger workers in terms of stability (Rosen and Jerdee, 1976), commitment (Craft et al., 1976), and job satisfaction (cf. Hassell and Perrewe, 1995). Moreover, organizational decisions about older workers may be affected by whether the rater holds negative views of older workers (Perry et al., 1996), whether there is an age stereotype associated with a particular job (Perry et al., 1996), and the age of the rater (Finkelstein et al., 1995). Finally, a more recent replication of earlier age bias studies showed that bias against older workers may be changing, with the development of negative stereotypes of younger workers as well (Weiss and Maurer, 2004). While there is less stereotyping literature focused on younger workers, there is evidence that there are both positive and negative stereotypes of younger workers as well (Posthuma and Campion, 2009). Younger workers are seen as more work-motivated, ambitious, and able to learn quickly than older workers. On the other hand, they are seen as less loyal and less emotionally stable (e.g. Gibson et al., 1993; Rosen and Jerdee, 1976). Thus, while research shows that generally younger workers are preferred to older workers (cf. Posthuma and Campion, 2009), younger workers also face negative stereotypes. The age stereotyping literature suggests that age of the rater or perceiver may also affect perceptions of younger versus older workers. For instance, in their meta-analysis, Finkelstein et al. (1995) found that younger raters tended to rate younger workers higher than older workers on a number of outcomes such as job qualifications and potential for development. These findings might be explained by social identity theory. Specifically, intergroup bias is the tendency to evaluate one’s own group more positively than that of people who do not belong to that group (cf. Hewstone et al., 2002). This phenomenon includes favoritism toward one’s own group and derogation of the out-group (cf. Hewstone et al.), and may manifest itself as a tendency for people to evaluate ambiguous information in a way that benefits their group. According to social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979), intergroup bias may protect a positive social identity for group members (Hewstone et al., 2002). In short, research suggests that age stereotypes may affect perceptions of older and younger workers, with different age groups rated differently on several dimensions. In addition, perceptions of older and younger workers may be affected by the age of the

Perceived personality and job performance 869

JMP 28,7/8

870

rater. However, research has not examined how older and younger workers are perceived in terms of job-related personality characteristics such as the FFM (e.g. Barrick and Mount, 1991) and specific dimensions of job performance such as task and contextual performance (e.g. Borman and Motowidlo, 1997). Age-related perceptions of the FFM and work performance The FFM framework (e.g. Costa and McCrae, 1992) has emerged as a robust model for understanding personality at work (Barrick and Mount, 1991). The FFM is composed of five factors, specifically, openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. We chose to use the FFM to study workplace stereotyping because it has become dominant in the I/O-OB research, with meta-analytic studies showing that FFM dimensions predict job performance (Barrick and Mount, 1991) and job attitudes ( Judge et al., 2002). Moreover, the FFM dimensions have been used not only to assess self-ratings but also the ratings of “others” (e.g. supervisor, coworkers; e.g. Mount et al., 1994; Watson et al., 2000). However, despite the importance of the FFM to work, the workplace age stereotyping literature has largely ignored whether older and younger workers are perceived differently in terms of FFM traits. Moreover, more recent views of work performance (e.g. Borman and Motowidlo, 1997) point out that work behaviors include not only those strictly associated with production, or task performance, but behaviors supporting the social work context, or contextual performance, such as being a good organizational citizen. However, perceived differences between older and younger workers in terms of task and contextual performance have received scant attention. In short, there is a gap in the literature because perceptions of older and younger workers in terms of the FFM and task and contextual performance could lead to different personnel decisions being made about them. Moreover, it would be useful to see if stereotypes of older and younger workers on these measures reflect real age differences found meta-analytically (e.g. Ng and Feldman, 2008; Roberts et al., 2006). A few studies in the developmental psychology and personality literatures have examined perceived age-related personality differences. For example, Haslam et al. (2007) found in a sample of undergraduates that agreeableness and conscientiousness were perceived as increasing across the lifespan, while neuroticism, extraversion, and openness were perceived to decrease. Similarly, research by Wood and Roberts (2006) found that people in different age roles are perceived to differ in terms of FFM dimensions. For example, perceptions of conscientiousness and emotional stability were associated with older age roles (e.g. grandparent), while perceptions of extraversion and openness to experience were related to younger age roles (e.g. college student). However, neither of these studies focused on perceptions of older and younger workers, nor did they use employee samples. Hypotheses Our studies go beyond the Wood and Roberts (2006) studies in three ways. First, we examine how older and younger workers are perceived in terms of the FFM and task and contextual performance, a new approach for examining age stereotyping at work. Second, we examine these issues using a field sample of employees. Third, we examine how the effects of age stereotypes on perceived personality and job performance are moderated by rater age. We expected that the intergroup bias (Hewstone et al., 2002)

would specify the nature of this interaction. Specifically, we believed that although older and younger workers would be perceived differently in terms of personality and performance, rater age would moderate these effects. That is, raters would perceive older and younger workers in ways that advantage their own age group. For example, raters may generally agree that older workers are higher in conscientiousness than younger workers, but this effect may be weaker among younger workers and stronger among older workers, each group perceiving the situation to its own advantage. Perceived personality Conscientiousness. People high on conscientiousness tend to be more determined and goal-oriented, reliable, and scrupulous (Costa and McCrae, 1992). Meta-analytic research illustrates that conscientiousness generally increases with age (Roberts et al., 2006). Wood and Roberts (2006) found that conscientiousness was perceived as higher for persons in older age roles. Therefore, because conscientiousness generally increases with age, and because Wood and Roberts (2006) found that conscientiousness was perceived to be associated with older age roles, we expected that older workers would be perceived as higher on conscientiousness than their younger counterparts. However, because of intergroup bias (Hewstone et al., 2002), we expected this effect to be more pronounced among older raters than among younger raters, because younger raters would not tend to see themselves as much lower on what is a positive characteristic: H1a. Older workers will be rated higher than younger workers in terms of conscientiousness. H1b. This effect will be more pronounced among older raters than among younger raters. Openness to experience. People high on openness to experience are intellectually curious and imaginative (Costa and McCrae, 1992). Openness has been found to increase with age from adolescence to adulthood, but then to level off or decline in later years (Roberts et al., 2006). Moreover, Wood and Roberts (2006) found that openness is more widely attributed to people who are in older age roles. Thus we believed that older workers would be perceived as higher on openness, but that this effect would be more pronounced among older workers because of intergroup bias. We thus hypothesized: H2a. Older workers will be rated higher than younger workers on openness to experience. H2b. This effect will be more pronounced among older raters than among younger raters. Neuroticism. Fear and embarrassment are some of the negative emotions experienced by people high on neuroticism (Costa and McCrae, 1992; McCrae and John, 1992). Neuroticism in its positive form is often referred to as emotional stability. Roberts et al. (2006) found that people increase in emotional stability with age. Similarly, Wood and Roberts (2006) found that people in older age roles were perceived as more emotionally stable. Thus, because younger people are higher on neuroticism than older people, and because people in younger age roles are perceived as less emotionally stable, we hypothesized that younger workers would be perceived higher in neuroticism than


JMP 28,7/8

older workers. However, because of the intergroup bias, we believed that the effect would be more pronounced among older raters than among younger raters, because younger raters should be less inclined to see themselves as much higher on a negative characteristic: H3a. Younger workers will be rated higher than older workers on neuroticism.

872

H3b. This effect will be stronger among older raters than among younger raters. Extraversion. People high on extraversion are characterized as liking other people and being active and talkative (Costa and McCrae, 1992). Roberts et al. (2006) found that extraversion decreases as people age. Wood and Roberts (2006) found that extraversion was perceived as declining with older age roles. Thus, because younger people are generally higher on extraversion than older people, and because people in younger age roles are perceived as higher on extraversion, we believed that younger workers would be rated as higher in extraversion than older workers. However, because of intergroup bias, we hypothesized that the effect would be more pronounced among younger raters than among older raters, because older raters would be less inclined to see themselves lower on what is a positive characteristic: H4a. Younger workers will be rated higher than older workers on extraversion. H4b. This effect will be stronger among younger raters than among older raters. Agreeableness. Likable, cheerful, adaptable, cooperative, complying, and sympathetic are the characteristics that describe those high on agreeableness (Costa and McCrae, 1992). Wood and Roberts (2006) found that people in older age roles were perceived as more agreeable. Roberts et al. (2006) found that agreeableness only decreased very late in life. In short, actual agreeableness does not decline until a person is much older (post-retirement), and people in older age roles are generally perceived as more agreeable. Thus, the limited literature suggests that older workers would be perceived as more agreeable than younger workers. However, because of the intergroup bias, we hypothesized that these effects would be more pronounced among older raters than among younger raters, because younger raters would tend not to see themselves as having lower levels of a positive characteristic: H5a. Older workers will be rated higher than younger workers on agreeableness. H5b. This effect will be more pronounced among older raters than among younger raters. Perceived job performance Task performance. Task performance is defined as worker behavior that contributes to technical organizational performance (Borman and Motowidlo, 1997). In reality, task performance seems to be stable with age (Ng and Feldman, 2008). We are not aware of other studies that explored perceived age differences in task performance. However, because of intergroup bias, we hypothesized: H6. Older raters will rate the task performance of older workers higher than that of younger workers. In contrast, younger workers will rate their group as higher on task performance than older workers.

Contextual performance. Contextual performance is behavior that contributes to the social and psychological core of the organization (Borman and Motowidlo, 1997). Contextual performance is said to consist of organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), which are extra-role behaviors that support coworkers and the organization (Borman and Motowidlo, 1997). A two-dimensional conceptualization (Williams and Anderson, 1991) of OCB splits this construct into OCBi, or behaviors directed toward individuals (e.g. altruism toward colleagues) and OCBo, or behaviors directed toward the organization (e.g. willingness to work longer hours). Meta-analytic evidence (Ng and Feldman, 2008) shows that OCBs do increase with age. Research has also found that facets of conscientiousness increase with age (e.g. Roberts et al., 2006). This is important because conscientiousness is an antecedent of contextual performance (e.g. Borman and Motowidlo, 1997) and therefore of OCBs. Thus, because people in older age roles are perceived to be higher in conscientiousness (an antecedent of OCBs), and because the literature suggests that OCBs may increase with age, we hypothesized that older workers would be perceived more positively in terms of OCBs. However, because of intergroup bias, these effects should be more pronounced among older raters than among younger raters: H7a. Older workers will be rated higher than younger workers on OCBi. H7b. This effect will be stronger among older raters than younger raters. H8a. Older workers will be rated higher than younger workers on OCBo. H8b. This effect will be stronger among older raters than younger raters. Method Clerical and financial administration employees (n ¼ 168) in schools located in several cities of a Northeast Italian province participated in this study. Specifically, 7.1 percent were administrative officers who deal with administrative, financial, and accounting activities; 21.4 percent were administrative assistants who collaborate with the officer helping with financial and accounting tasks; and 68.5 percent were co-assistants, who perform the tasks given to them by the administrative assistant. Mean age for participants was 44.70 (SD ¼ 7:47, range ¼ 25-61), and 70 percent were more than 40 years old. Thirteen respondents did not indicate their age, so we excluded them from all analyses, resulting in a sample of 155 participants, corresponding to a final response rate of 92 percent. The majority of participants were women (83.7 percent). In the present sample, regarding the age ranges, 18 participants were between 21-34; 13 participants were between 55 and 61, and the majority were in the middle group. Specifically, 48 participants were between 35 and 44, and 76 participants were between 45 and 54. With regard to education, 1.2 percent had less than a high school degree, 88.7 percent had a high school degree, and 6.5 percent had a university degree (3.6 percent did not indicate their education). With regard to organizational tenure, 11.9 percent had less than five years with the organization, 16.1 percent had between five and ten years, and 68.5 percent had more than ten years of experience (3.6 percent did not indicate tenure). There is no consensus on the operationalization of “younger worker” and “older worker” among researchers (cf. Finkelstein and Farrell, 2007). In the present study, we operationalized “younger” and “older” workers as “24-34” and “55-65”, respectively. In


JMP 28,7/8

874

this way, “younger workers” and “older workers” would represent persons who are beginning their careers, as well as those who end their careers in the Italian employment context. We distributed the paper survey to employees randomly, so that respondents were assigned to rating either a younger employee (24-34) or an older employee (55-65). In the “younger worker target” condition, participants read the following statement: “Here is a list of phrases used to describe people. Please indicate the extent to which you believe that each describes a typical worker who is 24-34 years old”. In the “older worker target” condition, participants read the same statement, but they answered regarding a typical worker aged 55-65 years old. In the final sample of 155, 72 participants were in the “younger worker” condition, and 83 were in the “older worker” condition. Measures Perceived FFM. Perceptions of older and younger workers were measured by five dimensions of the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP; Goldberg et al., 2006, translated into Italian by Flebus, 2006). Participants responded on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (very inaccurate) to 5 (very accurate) for the five dimensions, which were composed of 12 items each (conscientiousness, ay ¼ 0:87, ao ¼ 0:82, overall a ¼ 0:87; openness to experience, ay ¼ 0:88, ao ¼ 0:84, overall a ¼ 0:85; neuroticism, ay ¼ 0:90, ao ¼ 0:90, overall a ¼ 0:90; extraversion, ay ¼ 0:78, ao ¼ 0:88, overall a ¼ 0:84; agreeableness, ay ¼ 0:88, ao ¼ 0:89, overall a ¼ 0:89). A sample item for conscientiousness is “Workers in this age range carry out their plans”; for openness to experience, “Enjoy hearing new ideas”,; for neuroticism, “Have frequent mood swings”; for extraversion, “Are skilled in handling social situations”; and for agreeableness, “Respect others”. Perceived job performance. Perceptions of task performance for older and younger workers were assessed using a six-item scale developed by Williams and Anderson (1991; ay ¼ 0:87, ao ¼ 0:82, overall a ¼ 0:85). A sample item is “Workers in this age range adequately complete assigned duties”. Perceptions of contextual performance were assessed using a two-dimensional scale developed by Williams and Anderson (1991). The two scales are OCBi and OCBo. For the seven-item OCBi scale, ay ¼ 0:88, ao ¼ 0:88, and overall a ¼ 0:87, and for the four-item OCBo scale, ay ¼ 0:61, ao ¼ 0:60, overall a ¼ 0:62. A sample item for OCBi is “Help others who have heavy workloads”, and for OCBo, “Avoid taking undeserved breaks from work”. Responses were made on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Demographic information. The demographic section of the questionnaire asked questions about the participants’ age, gender, education level, and organizational tenure. Participants were assured of the confidentiality and anonymity of their responses, and they returned the survey directly to the researchers. Results Means, standard deviations, intercorrelations, and alpha reliabilities of the study variables are presented in Table I. We used hierarchical regression to test the eight hypotheses. The eight dependent variables in these equations were conscientiousness (H1), openness to experience (H2), neuroticism (H3), extraversion (H4), agreeableness

M

SD

1

2

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

20.10 0.06 0.10 20.09 0.04 0.38 * * (0.87) 20.02 0.01 0.02 0.50 * * (0.85) 0.01 0.07 20.19 * 20.42 * * 20.27 * * (0.90) 0.39 * * 20.37 * * 0.44 * * (0.84) 20.23 * * 20.06 20.14 20.15 0.09 0.26 * * 0.58 * * 20.36 * * 0.50 * * 0.42 * * (0.89) 20.01 0.03 0.12 0.59 * * 20.35 * * 0.34 * * 0.30 * * 0.32 * * (0.85) 20.04 0.03 0.30 * * 0.67 * * 20.42 * * 0.41 * * 0.21 * * 0.45 * * 0.68 * * (0.87) 0.04 0.02 0.21 * * 0.55 * * 20.39 * * 0.43 * * 0.23 * * 0.57 * * 0.46 * * 0.57 * * (0.62)

3

Notes: Gender was coded 0 ¼ men, 1 ¼ women; educational level was coded 0 ¼ less than high school, 1 ¼ high school diploma, 2 ¼ university degree; 3 ¼ post university degree; organizational tenure was coded 0 ¼ less than five years, 1 ¼ between five and ten years, 2 ¼ more than ten years; target age condition was coded 0 ¼ younger, 1 ¼ older; personality and job performance variables were perceptions of an older or younger target; *p , 0:05; * *p , 0:01

1. Rater age 44.70 7.50 2. Gender 0.84 0.37 0.03 3. Educational level 1.06 0.28 20.03 20.15 4. Organizational 0.04 tenure 1.60 0.70 0.48 * * 5. Age target 0.52 0.50 0.09 0.07 0.19 * 6. Conscientiousness 3.30 0.57 0.38 * * 7. Openness 2.95 0.52 0.02 0.03 8. Neuroticism 2.95 0.65 20.19 * 20.07 9. Extraversion 3.15 0.47 20.14 0.05 0.04 10. Agreeableness 3.18 0.58 0.26 * * 11. Task performance 3.32 0.66 20.50 0.04 0.13 12. OCBi 3.20 0.73 0.30 * * 0.01 13. OCBo 2.70 0.73 0.21 * *

Variables


Table I. Means, standard deviations, intercorrelations and alpha reliabilities among study variables

JMP 28,7/8

876

(H5), task performance (H6), and contextual performance (OCBi, H7; OCBo: H8). Rater age (centered) and the target age condition (younger target versus older target; coded 0 and 1, respectively) were entered in Step 1. The interaction term, which was the product of rater’s age and the age of the target, was entered in Step 2. Results for each of the Big Five variables are presented in Table II, and results for task and contextual performance are presented in Table III. Note that for the main effects, we report the betas from the first step in the text below, and we report the betas for the final equation in the table. Beta values for the main effects may change with the addition of the interaction term[1]. H1a posited that older workers would be rated higher than younger workers on conscientiousness. The results showed a significant main effect for age of the target worker (b ¼ 0:37, t ¼ 4:98, p ¼ 0:001) indicating that older workers were rated more highly on conscientiousness than younger workers. H1b predicted that rater age would moderate this effect. The results supported H1b, as indicated by the significant increase in R 2 with the addition of the interaction term in Step 2, DR 2 ¼ 0:04, Fð1; 151Þ ¼ 7:90, p , 0:01. As hypothesized, rater age interacted with age of the target. The slopes for both younger and older raters are positive, but the slope was less pronounced for younger raters (see Figure 1). H2a posited that older workers would be rated higher than younger workers on openness to experience. The results showed that older and younger workers were not perceived differently in terms of openness to experience, b ¼ 20:01, t ¼ 20:16, NS. H2b posited that the age of the rater would interact with age of the target. As indicated by the significant increase in R 2 with the addition of the interaction term in Step 2, DR 2 ¼ 0:03, Fð1; 151Þ ¼ 4:55, p , 0:05, the interaction was significant. Figure 2 shows that older workers perceived older targets as higher on openness to experience, while younger workers perceived younger targets as higher on openness to experience. H3a posited that younger workers would be perceived as higher on neuroticism than older workers (i.e. older workers would be perceived as more stable). The results showed a significant main effect for age of the target, b ¼ 20:20, t ¼ 22:44, p , 0:05, indicating that younger workers were rated higher on neuroticism than older workers. H3b predicted that rater age would moderate this main effect. The results supported the hypothesis, as indicated by the significant increase in R 2 with the addition of the interaction term in Step 2, DR 2 ¼ 0:04, Fð1; 148Þ ¼ 6:51, p , 0:05. Figure 3 indicates an interaction in which older raters perceive younger workers as more neurotic than older workers, whereas younger raters do not perceive a significant difference between younger and older targets on neuroticism. H4a, that younger workers would be rated higher than older workers on extraversion (b ¼ 20:15, t ¼ 21:89, NS), was not supported. Similarly, the interaction effect predicted by H4b (DR 2 ¼ 0:01, Fð1; 150Þ ¼ 1:10, NS) was not supported. Regarding agreeableness (H5a), there was a main effect for age of the target, b ¼ 0:26, t ¼ 3:31, p , 0:01, indicating that older workers are perceived as more agreeable than younger workers. However, H5b was not supported, as age of the rater did not moderate this effect, DR 2 ¼ 0:02, Fð1; 146Þ ¼ 3:05, NS. H6 examined whether older raters would perceive older workers more positively in terms of task performance, and whether younger raters would perceive younger workers more positively. The results did not support this interaction, DR 2 ¼ 0:01, Fð1; 146Þ ¼ 1:86, NS.

0.19 * *

Step 2 Rater age £ Target age

0.04 * * 1.2 *

20.15 20.86 0.04 *

0.02

R2

0.03 * 1.07 *

2 0.06 2 1.04

Openness DR 2 b

0.08 *

0.04

R2

0.04 * 21.27 *

0.28 * 1.02 *

Neuroticism DR 2 b

0.03

0.01 0.52

20.11 20.65

Extraversion DR 2 b

0.02

R2

0.10

0.08 *

0.02 0.86

2 0.06 2 0.56

Agreeableness R2 DR 2 b

Notes: n ¼ 155; target age is the age of the target being rated; 0 ¼ younger worker, 1 ¼ older worker; betas are for the final equation (note that the betas for the first step are reported in the text); *p , 0:05; * *p , 0:01

0.15 * *

Conscientiousness R2 DR 2 b

Step 1 Rater age Target age

Variable


Table II. Hierarchical OLS regressions for predicting the perceived big five personality of older and younger workers

JMP 28,7/8

878

H7a posited that older workers would be rated higher than younger workers on OCBi. The results supported H7a, b ¼ 0:31, t ¼ 4:01, p , 0:01. In addition, in support of H7b, rater age moderated this effect, as shown by the significant increase in R 2 with the addition of the interaction term in Step 2, DR 2 ¼ 0:06, Fð1; 147Þ ¼ 9:22, p , 0:05. This interaction is shown graphically in Figure 4. Older raters perceived younger targets to be lower in OCBi than older targets. Younger raters perceived younger targets to be slightly higher in OCBi. H8a posited that older workers would be rated higher on OCBo than younger workers. Results supported the hypothesis, b ¼ :22, t ¼ 2:70, p , 0:01. In addition, in support of H8b, rater age moderated these effects, DR 2 ¼ 0:08, Fð1; 145Þ ¼ 13:15, p , 0:001. As shown in Figure 5, older raters rated older workers higher on OCBo. This effect was less pronounced among younger raters. Discussion This study showed that older and younger workers are perceived differently in terms of the FFM and job performance, and that these results are moderated by rater age. First, older and younger workers were perceived differently in terms of the FFM and key job performance dimensions. These perceptions to some degree reflect real

Variable

Task performance R 2 DR 2 b

R2

OCBi DR 2

b

0.09 * *

Table III. Hierarchical OLS regressions for predicting the perceived task performance, OCBi, and OCBo of older and younger workers

Figure 1. Interaction between rater age and target age on perceived conscientiousness

Step 1 0.02 Rater age 20.19 Target age 20.53 Step 2 0.04 0.01 0.10 * Rater age £ Target age 0.70

R2

OCBo DR 2

0.05 * 0.06 *

20.29 21.16 * 1.55 * *

0.13 * * 0.08 * *

b 2 0.31 * * 2 1.47 * * 1.76 * *

Notes: n ¼ 155; target age is the age of the target being rated; 0 ¼ younger worker, 1 ¼ older worker; betas are for the final equation (note that the betas for the first step are reported in the text); *p , 0:05; * *p , 0:01

Perceived personality and job performance 879 Figure 2. Interaction between rater age and target age on perceived openness to experience

Figure 3. Interaction between rater age and target age on perceived neuroticism

Figure 4. Interaction between rater age and target age on perceived OCBi

JMP 28,7/8

880 Figure 5. Interaction between rater age and target age on perceived OCBo

age-related differences in personality and work performance found meta-analytically (Ng and Feldman, 2008; Roberts et al., 2006). Thus, this study shows that the FFM and task and contextual job performance could provide a useful framework for examining age stereotypes, and perhaps other stereotypes as well. Second, many of these stereotypes favor older workers. Third, age of the rater affected the ratings made of older and younger workers, suggesting an intergroup bias. This study goes beyond previous studies focused on the examination of general age bias (e.g. Perry et al., 1996). The FFM and task and contextual performance are accepted as relevant in the workplace, but importantly, perceptions of these personality and performance dimensions have not been studied. Such perceptions may have an impact on the decisions that managers make regarding older and younger workers (e.g. selection, promotions). Older workers were perceived more positively than younger workers on most dimensions. Older workers were perceived to be more conscientious (cf., Rosen and Jerdee, 1976), emotionally stable (i.e. less neurotic, cf. Gibson et al., 1993; Rosen and Jerdee, 1976), and more agreeable (Cuddy and Fiske, 2002). These perceptions generally reflected real age-related differences on FFM variables (Roberts et al., 2006). Further, older workers were perceived more positively in terms of OCBo and OCBi, which is consistent with Ng and Feldman’s (2008) meta-analysis about actual age differences in job performance. Our findings did not show differences in terms of task performance, which is consistent with the null relationship between age and actual task performance found by Ng and Feldman (2008). Perhaps age effects on task performance would be found in fields with a greater job-age stereotype (e.g. high-tech). Further, rater age moderated these effects. Consistent with the intergroup bias phenomenon (cf. Hewstone et al., 2002), older raters tended to evaluate an older worker more positively, and younger raters tended to rate younger workers more positively. For example, older workers were perceived to be higher on conscientiousness than younger workers, but this effect was weaker among younger raters. In fact, we found a completely disordinal interaction for openness to experience, where older raters perceived older targets as higher on openness, but younger raters perceived younger targets as higher. In this way, raters supported their own age group. Overall, these results support the phenomenon of intergroup bias (cf. Hewstone et al., 2002) that takes

place when favoritism is shown toward one’s reference group. Alternatively, relational demography, which posits that people are most attracted to people that are similar to themselves, could also be used to explain how age of the rater and age of the target interact to affect perceptions (e.g. Shore et al., 2003). For example, Shore et al. (2003) used relational demography to explain their finding that age of the manager and age of the employee interacted to affect performance ratings. One key finding is that age stereotypes may not always disadvantage older workers. On the contrary, older workers were perceived more positively on most dimensions, which could favor older workers in organizational decisions. This may partly be because the aging of the large baby-boomer cohort of workers has resulted in people being more accustomed to seeing older workers. These results are also consistent with more recent work which suggests that age stereotypes may be changing (e.g. Weiss and Maurer, 2004), in the sense that the generally negative old age stereotypes in earlier studies (e.g. Rosen and Jerdee, 1977) are not always supported. Potential limitations Although this study contributes to the literature, it is important to note some potential limitations. First, the sample was from administrative employees in public schools, and results may thus not generalize to other samples. However, the sample was strong in that it was composed of a range of administrative jobs. Second, although we used cross-sectional data collection, we used an experimental design with participants randomly assigned to conditions of rating either an older or younger worker, which is, in fact, a strength of this study and helps with the interpretation of our data. Third, although the alpha for the OCBo scale was a bit low, we were able to obtain support for our hypotheses. Some past research has also found the alpha of this OCBo scale to be low (e.g. Byrne and Cropanzano, 2000; Williams and Anderson, 1991). Another limitation is that this study examined perceptions of older and younger workers, not affect towards workers in these categories. Specifically, people may have positive perceptions of older workers’ traits, but still react negatively to them on an affective level (cf. Finkelstein and Farrell, 2007). This could cause people to reject older workers as team members, even if they think they are good performers. Also, we did not examine ratings of actual older and younger co-workers, but general stereotypes towards workers in these groups. We used this design because having workers rate actual co-workers would lead to less interpretable data: that is, it would not be clear whether findings were the result of stereotypes or actual performance differences between older and younger coworkers in terms of the Big Five, which have already been shown meta-analytically (Roberts et al., 2006). Finally, our sample included a range of ages, not just people in the “younger” (24-34) and “older” (55-65) categories. Such a bimodal sample would be difficult to obtain in the field. Importantly, we were still able to find the moderating effects of rater age, implying that these are robust effects. Future research We see several implications for future research. First, perceived FFM may be a useful framework for examining age stereotypes in organizations. Future research should see whether these personality- and performance-based stereotypes of older and younger workers translate into different decisions being made about them in the workplace. Specifically, we think that these stereotypes may not only affect the valence of


JMP 28,7/8

882

decisions made about older and younger workers (i.e. positive versus negative), but also have a differential impact on different types of decisions (e.g. for different types of jobs, for training versus selection versus team membership). Second, age of the rater should also be taken into consideration in research regarding age stereotypes, as intergroup bias seemed to be at play in these studies. Third, as suggested by Kulik et al. (2007), future research should take into consideration other demographic variables such as gender. For example, it would be interesting to investigate perceived personality of older men and women. Moreover, future research should examine what is meant by “older” and “younger” workers, as there is no a clear consensus about these categories (cf. Finkelstein and Farrell, 2007). Implications for practice Research has shown that evaluators rate older and younger job applicants differently (Perry et al., 1996), and that recruiters make assumptions about applicants’ personalities based on their resumes (e.g. Cole et al., 2009) or interviews. It may be that assumptions about the personality and performance of older and younger workers affect decisions made about them in organizations. Recruiters and managers could thus be trained to be aware of the potential influences of these stereotypes with the goal of reducing their effect. Moreover, with the aging of baby boomers and their increased participation in today’s workforce, younger workers may also become more susceptible to negative age stereotypes. For example, older managers could prefer older workers for jobs requiring higher emotional stability, whereas younger managers could prefer younger workers for jobs demanding more openness to experience. In conclusion, this study moves the workplace age stereotyping literature forward, examining these issues using an experimental methodology. Older and younger workers were perceived differently in terms of the FFM and job performance dimensions, and rater age moderated these effects. Many of these stereotypes favored older workers. We encourage future research to use this framework to examine age stereotypes and how they might affect organizational decisions. Note 1. We also ran these analyses using gender as a control variable. However, the results for the hypotheses remained the same. Therefore, for the sake of simplicity we chose not to include gender as a control variable. References Arthur, D. (2006), Recruiting, Interviewing, Selecting & Orienting New Employees, AMACOM, New York, NY. Barrick, M.R. and Mount, M.K. (1991), “The big five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta-analysis”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 44, pp. 1-26. Borman, W.C. and Motowidlo, S.J. (1997), “Task performance and contextual performance: the meaning for personnel selection research”, Human Performance, Vol. 102, pp. 99-109. Byrne, Z.S. and Cropanzano, R. (2000), “The relationship of organizational justice to commitment, organizational politics, and citizenship behaviors: a test of three models”, in Byrne, Z.S. (Ed.), What Does it Mean to be Fair? Organizational Justice and Effective Work Behaviors, Proceedings of the 15th Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA.

Carone, G. and Costello, D. (2006), “Can Europe afford to grow old?”, Finance and Development, Vol. 43, pp. 1-9. Cole, M.S., Feild, H.S., Giles, W.F. and Harris, S.G. (2009), “Recruiters’ inferences of applicant personality based on resume screening: do paper people have a personality?”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 24, pp. 5-18. Costa, P.T. Jr and McCrae, R.R. (1992), NEO PI-R: Professional Manual.Revised NEO Personality Inventory NEO PR-R and NEO Five-Factor Inventory NEO-RRI, Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc., Odessa, FL. Craft, J., Doctors, S., Shkop, Y. and Benecki, T. (1976), “Simulated management perceptions, hiring decisions and age”, Age and Work, Vol. 2, pp. 95-102. Cuddy, A.J. and Fiske, S.T. (2002), “Doddering but dear: process, content and function in stereotyping of older persons”, in Nelson, T. (Ed.), Ageism: Stereotyping and Prejudice Against Older Persons, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 3-26. Flebus, G.B. (2006), “Versione Italiana dei Big Five Markers di Goldberg”, Universita` di Milano-Bicocca, Milan. Finkelstein, L.M. and Farrell, S.K. (2007), “An expanded view of age bias in the workplace”, in Schultz, K.S. and Adams, G.A. (Eds), Aging and Work in the 21st Century, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 73-108. Finkelstein, L.M., Burke, M.J. and Raju, N.S. (1995), “Age discrimination in simulated employment contexts: an integrative analysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 80, pp. 652-663. Gibson, K.J., Zerbe, W.J. and Franken, R.E. (1993), “The influence of rater and rate age on judgments of work-related attributes”, Journal of Psychology, Vol. 127, pp. 271-280. Goldberg, L.R., Johnson, J.A., Eber, H.W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M.C., Cloninger, C.R. and Gough, H.C. (2006), “The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures”, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 40, pp. 84-96. Gordon, R.A. and Arvey, R.D. (2004), “Age bias in laboratory and field settings: a meta-analytic investigation”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 34, pp. 468-492. Haslam, N., Bastian, B., Fox, C. and Whelan, J. (2007), “Beliefs about personality change and continuity”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 42, pp. 1621-1631. Hassell, B.L. and Perrewe, P.L. (1995), “An examination of beliefs about older workers: do stereotypes still exist?”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 16, pp. 457-468. Hewstone, M. and Jaspars, J.M.F. (1982), “Intergroup relations and attribution processes”, in Tajfel, H. (Ed.), Social Identity and Intergroup Relations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 99-133. Hewstone, M., Rubin, M. and Willis, H. (2002), “Intergroup bias”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 53, pp. 575-604. Judge, T.A., Heller, D. and Mount, M.K. (2002), “Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, pp. 530-541. Kulik, C.T., Roberson, L. and Perry, E.L. (2007), “The multiple-category problem: category activation and inhibition in the hiring process”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32, pp. 529-548. McCrae, R.R. and John, O.P. (1992), “An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications”, Journal of Personality, Vol. 2, pp. 175-215. Motowidlo, W.C. and Van Scotter, J.R. (1994), “Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79, pp. 475-480.


JMP 28,7/8

884

Mount, M.K., Barrick, M.R. and Strauss, J.P. (1994), “Validity of observer ratings of the Big Five personality factors”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79, pp. 272-280. Ng, T.W.H. and Feldman, D.C. (2008), “The relationship of age to ten dimensions of job performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 93, pp. 392-423. Perry, E.L., Kulik, C.T. and Bourhis, A.C. (1996), “Moderating effects of personal and contextual factors in age discrimination”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 81, pp. 628-647. Posthuma, R.A. and Campion, M.A. (2009), “Age stereotypes in the workplace: common stereotypes, moderators, and future research directions”, Journal of Management, Vol. 35, pp. 158-188. Roberts, B.W., Walton, K.E. and Viechtbauer, W. (2006), “Personality traits change in adulthood: reply to Costa and McCrae (2006)”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 132, pp. 29-32. Rosen, B. and Jerdee, T.H. (1976), “The nature of job-related age stereotypes”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 61, pp. 180-183. Rosen, B. and Jerdee, T.H. (1977), “Too old or not too old?”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 55, pp. 97-106. Shore, L.M., Cleveland, J.N. and Goldberg, C.B. (2003), “Work attitudes and decisions as a function of manager age and employee age”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88, pp. 529-537. Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1979), “An integrative theory of intergroup conflict”, in Austin, W.G. and Worchel, S. (Eds), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, Brooks-Cole, Monterey, CA. Warr, P. (1994), “Age and employment”, in Triandis, H.C., Dunnette, M.D. and Hough, L.M. (Eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., Vol. 4, Consulting Psychologist Press, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 485-550. Warr, P. (2001), “Age and work behaviour: physical attributes, cognitive abilities, knowledge, personality traits and motives”, in Cooper, C.L. and Robertson, I.T. (Eds), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 16, Wiley, Chichester, pp. 1-36. Watson, D., Hubbard, B. and Wiese, D. (2000), “Self-other agreement in personality and affectivity: the role of acquaintanceship, trait visibility, and assumed similarity”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 78, pp. 546-558. Weiss, E.M. and Maurer, T.J. (2004), “Age discrimination in personnel decisions: a reexamination”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 34, pp. 1551-1562. Williams, L.J. and Anderson, S.E. (1991), “Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors”, Journal of Management, Vol. 17, pp. 601-617. Wood, D. and Roberts, B.W. (2006), “The effect of age and role information on expectations for Big Five personality traits”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 32, pp. 1482-1496. About the authors Marilena Bertolino is an Assistant Professor of I/O Psychology in the Department of Psychology, Laboratoire d’Anthropologie et de Psychologie Cognitives et Sociales (LAPCOS) at University of Nice Sophia-Antipolis (France), where she received her PhD in 2004. Her primary research interests are in the area of discrimination in the workplace, including age stereotyping and other issues regarding older and younger workers. She also conducts research on applicant reactions among minority and majority groups in France, based on organizational justice theory. Moreover, she is interested in the antecedents of workplace safety, including the role of

individual variables in relation to safety behavior. Marilena Bertolino is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected] Donald M. Truxillo is a Professor in the Department of Psychology at Portland State University, Portland, Oregon. His research interests include applicant and test-taker reactions, older worker issues including older worker stereotypes and motivation, and workplace safety. He is a fellow of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology and the American Psychological Association. Franco Fraccaroli received his PhD from the University of Trento, where he is currently a Professor of Work and Organizational Psychology. He is currently Dean of the Faculty of Cognitive Science and past President of the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology. His research interests include organizational socialization, older workers and late career, and psychosocial risks in organizations.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
