Personality in sport and exercise psychology: Integrating a whole person perspective

This paper draws on contemporary views in personality psychology as a means for understanding people participating in sport and physical activity. Specifically, we focus on McAdams’ integrative framework [McAdams (2013). The psychological self as actor, agent, and author. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 272–295; McAdams & Pals (2006). A new big five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist, 61, 204–217] and suggest this framework as potentially generative in the field of sport and exercise psychology. McAdams indicates that people can be defined through three layers of understanding, incorporating (a) dispositional traits, (b) characteristic adaptations, and (c) narrative identities. Together these layers provide a vision of the whole person – a perspective of personality rarely adopted by the sport and exercise community. The aim of this paper is to introduce scholars and practitioners to the potential benefits of embracing this whole person outlook, and to discuss the opportunities and challenges McAdams’ framework may have for advancing scholarship in sport and exercise psychology.

Is stereotype threat a useful construct for organizational psychology research and practice?

Stereotypes about different groups persist in organizations. Employees from such groups may experience stereotype threat, or the concern that they are being judged on the basis of demeaning stereotypes about groups to which they belong. The goal of this focal article is to discuss whether stereotype threat is a useful construct for organizational psychology research and practice. To this end, we focus on consequences other than acute performance deficits in laboratory settings. In particular, we examine studies that highlight the effects of stereotype threat on intrapersonal outcomes (e.g., job attitudes), interpersonal outcomes (e.g., negotiation), and on the relationship between employees and their organization. The research reviewed suggests that stereotype threat is a potentially important phenomenon in organizations, but it also highlights the paucity of research in an organizational context. We provide suggestions for future research directions as well as for the prevention and amelioration of stereotype threat in the workplace.

Drink driving among Indigenous Australians in outer regional and remote communities and development of a drink driving program: A summary of findings and recommendations

Drink driving is a leading cause of criminal justice system contact for Indigenous Australians. National and state strategies recommend Indigenous road safety initiatives are warranted. However, there is sparse evidence to inform drink driving-related preventive and treatment measures. Using quantitative and qualitative methods, the study examines the profile of Queensland’s Indigenous drink drivers using court convictions and identifies the contributing psycho-social, cultural and contextual factors through qualitative interviews.

Criminal intent

The High Court recently heard submissions of counsel in Zaburoni v The Queen. This case concerns an appeal against conviction for transmitting a serious disease with intent under section 317(b) and (e) of the Queensland Criminal Code. It raises important issues about the meaning of intent and how intent can be proven in Queensland criminal offences. Since intent is an element of so many of the more serious crimes, it is surprising to see that the courts, both in England and Australia, continue to grapple with how best to define it. In murder, for example, the accused is potentially going to be locked up for a very long time, so it is essential that the courts and juries are very clear on what intent actually means, so that they can be confident in correctly finding that it was present on the facts of the case.

A “business researcher” view on opportunities for psychology in entrepreneurship research

In this short essay I offer some “business researcher” advice on how to leverage a strong background in psychology when attempting to contribute to the maturing field of “entrepreneurship research”. Psychologists can benefit from within-discipline research, e.g. on emergence, small groups, fit, and expertise as well as method strengths in, e.g. experimentation, operationalisation of constructs, and multi-level modelling. However, achieving full leverage of these strengths requires a clear conceptualisation of “entrepreneurship” as well as insights into the challenges posed by the nature of this class of phenomena.