|عنوان مقاله||Faculty narcissism and student outcomes in business higher education: A student-faculty fit analysis|
|ترجمه عنوان مقاله||عواقب خودشیفتگی دانشکده و دانشجویان در آموزش عالی کسب و کار: تجزیه و تحلیل مناسب استاد-دانشجو|
|نوع نگارش مقاله||مقاله پژوهشی (Research article)|
|مقاله بیس||این مقاله بیس میباشد|
|تعداد صفحات مقاله||۱۱ صفحه|
|رشته های مرتبط||علوم تربیتی و مدیریت|
|گرایش های مرتبط||مدیریت و برنامه ریزی آموزشی، مدیریت کسب و کار MBA|
|دانشگاه||گروه مدیریت، دانشگاه ایالتی آپالاچی، ایالات متحده آمریکا|
|کلمات کلیدی||خودشیفتگی، آموزش مديريت، عملکرد دانش آموزان، وضعیت، فرد و محیط مناسب|
|تعداد کلمات||۵۱۷۵ کلمه|
|لینک مقاله در سایت مرجع||لینک این مقاله در سایت الزویر (ساینس دایرکت) Sciencedirect – Elsevier|
|وضعیت ترجمه مقاله||ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید.|
|دانلود رایگان مقاله||دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی|
|سفارش ترجمه این مقاله||سفارش ترجمه این مقاله|
|بخشی از متن مقاله:|
|۱٫ Narcissism, personality fit, and business education
As this study specifically examines student-faculty personality congruence with regard to the personality dimension of narcissism, a description of narcissism is in order. Narcissists possess an inflated, yet vulnerable, self-view, but are unable to regulate this fragile self-esteem, and must rely on others for affirmation (Campbell, Rudich, & Sedikides, 2002; Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001). Thus, despite a lack of empathy and difficulty forming close relationships, narcissists have a strong desire for social contact, as such contacts are their key source of attention and admiration. Narcissists, then, in order to maintain their inflated egos, engage in a variety of social behaviors designed to garner attention and praise, which manifest as displays of self-importance and self-focus. Common examples include expectations of special treatment with explicit beliefs of owing little or nothing in return (American Psychiatric Association, 2000; Millon, 1996), exhibitionism and other types of attention-seeking behavior (Buss & Chiodo, 1991), hyper-competitiveness (Emmons, 1984; Raskin & Terry, 1988), anger and self-enhancing attributions in response to criticism (Farwell & Wohlwend-Lloyd, 1998), and derogation of those who provide threatening feedback (Kernis & Sun, 1994). Narcissism represents one of three personality dimensions of the Dark Triad (with Machiavellianism and psychopathy), which has been linked in a meta-analysis by O’Boyle, Forsyth, Banks, and McDaniel (2012) to counterproductive work behaviors and decreased performance in organizations.
Although there currently exists a gap in the literature in regards to research on the specific personality dimension of narcissism and its effects on classroom outcomes, the more holistic importance of personality and personality congruence to academic outcomes has been well-established. A review of the literature on personality and personality congruence in higher education provides a foundation for the influence of narcissism on student academic outcomes. Research that spans five decades has shown that personalities relate systematically and predictably to a range of educational outcomes (Furnham, Christopher, Garwood, & Martin, 2008). For example, personality has been generally related to academic performance (Caspi, Chajut, Saporta, & Beyth-Marom, 2006), and personality traits are among the individual-difference characteristics that have been predictive of college attrition and dropout rates (Lounsbury, Saudargas, Gibson, & Leong, 2005). Personality traits have also been related to classroom behaviors including amount of participation, oral expression, written expression, motivation, work habits, and grasp of subject matter (Furnham et al., 2008). Personality has been found to be predictive of learning styles across multiple studies (Zhang, 2006), and has been related to student preference for grading or evaluation method in educational settings (Furnham et al., 2008). Students’ personality traits have also been related to residence hall placement, orientation, leadership development, and advising (Lounsbury et al., 2005). Essentially, personality information may be influential in nearly every college situation where a student has to make a choice concerning commitment, involvement, membership, and/or participation (Lounsbury et al., 2005).
The research on person-organization (PeO) fit has further refined our understanding and measurement of the implications of individual/environment interaction, and provides the potential for a more nuanced understanding of the student/ faculty narcissism fit relationship. The roots of the PeO fit approach stem from Murray’s (1938) need-press theory, which described the interaction between an individual’s needs and the demands of an environment in determining individual attitudes and outcomes. Pace and Stern (1958) suggested that the “congruence between personal needs and environmental press will be more predictive of (student) achievement, growth and change than any single aspect of either the person or the environment” (p. 277). One approach to PeO fit is to examine the degree to which a person “supplements, embellishes, or possesses characteristics which are similar to other individuals” in an environment (Muchinsky & Monahan, 1987: 269). The implication of this approach to fit is that individuals possess cognitive prototypes of successful personalities in organizations, and congruence with such perceptions can reduce cognitive dissonance, out-group effects, and enhance attitudes and performance. Research has generally supported the congruence hypothesis in predicting student satisfaction and performance in educational settings (e.g., Bay, 1962; Fisher & Fraser, 1983; Funkenstein, 1962; Moos, 1979). Moreover, the widely documented tendency of individuals to prefer others who are similar to themselves (e.g., Brewer & Miller, 1984; Kramer, 1991; Messick & Mackie, 1989; Tajfel & Turner, 1986) indicates the potential for students to prefer and thrive in classrooms in which the instructor’s personality is similar to their own. Furthermore, it may even be possible that student divergence from the instructor’s personality increases out-group effects directed toward that individual. Such effects may decrease the attractiveness of the class for the group member, negatively influencing thoughts regarding the class.