Overlapping yet dissociable contributions of superiority illusion features to Ponzo illusion strength and metacognitive performance

Humans are typically inept at evaluating their abilities and predispositions. People dismiss such a lack of metacognitive insight into their capacities while even enhancing (albeit illusorily) self-evaluation such that they should have more desirable traits than an average peer. This superiority illusion helps maintain a healthy mental state. However, the scope and range of its influence on broader human behavior, especially perceptual tasks, remain elusive. As belief shapes the way people perceive and recognize, the illusory self-superiority belief potentially regulates our perceptual and metacognitive performance. In this study, we used hierarchical Bayesian estimation and machine learning of signal detection theoretic measures to understand how the superiority illusion influences visual perception and metacognition for the Ponzo illusion. Our results demonstrated that the superiority illusion correlated with the Ponzo illusion magnitude and metacognitive performance. Next, we combined principal component analysis and cross-validated regularized regression (relaxed elastic net) to identify which superiority components contributed to the correlations. We revealed that the "extraversion" superiority dimension tapped into the Ponzo illusion magnitude and metacognitive ability. In contrast, the "honesty-humility" and "neuroticism" dimensions only predicted Ponzo illusion magnitude and metacognitive ability, respectively. These results suggest common and distinct influences of superiority features on perceptual sensitivity and metacognition. Our findings contribute to the accumulating body of evidence indicating that the leverage of superiority illusion is far-reaching, even to visual perception.

Similar or Different Effects? Quantifying the Effects of Humility and Modesty on Job Performance

Humility and modesty are both emphasized in Eastern and Western societies. However, people usually conflate them in everyday usage. To reduce the confusion of the two constructs, it is very vital to carefully differentiate the two constructs and examine whether they lead to similar or different effects on job performance. In this study, we scrutinized the effects of the two constructs on four dimensions of job performance simultaneously, including task performance, citizenship behavior (helping and voicing), unethical pro-organizational behavior, and innovative behavior. Using a dataset of 239 employees and 77 supervisors, we showed that modesty is not related to task performance and voicing, but that it is positively related to unethical pro-organizational behavior and negatively related to helping and innovative behavior. In contrast, we showed that humility is negatively related to unethical pro-organizational behavior and positively related to task performance, helping, voicing, and innovative behavior. Our findings reveal that modesty and humility can lead to very divergent work outcomes. The results strongly support the idea that modesty and humility are distinct constructs embedded in separate nomological networks and strongly suggest that organizations should encourage employees’ humility rather than modesty. The theoretical and practical implications of this work are discussed.

The HEXACO Model in Education and Work

Abstract. Researchers have long been interested in examining relationships between personality traits and performance in applied settings. Although the Big Five remains the most prevalent model of personality, studies adopting an alternative personality model known as the HEXACO model have been increasing in the past decade (e.g., Ashton et al., 2004 ; Lee & Ashton, 2004 ). The aims of the present paper are three-fold: First, we systematically review the literature on the HEXACO model and its applications in educational and work settings. Second, we introduce an emerging applied personality framework for use in educational research and practice, the ACT Behavioral Skills Framework ( Casillas, Way, & Burrus, 2015 ), which is based on the HEXACO model. Third, we offer a number of suggestions for how future research can continue to refine the development and application of the HEXACO model in educational and organizational research and practice.