Contextual Performance in Academic SettingsThe role of personality, self-efficacy, and impression management

  1. Naira Delgado Rodríguez 1
  2. Estefanía Hernández Fernaud 1
  3. Christian Rosales Sánchez 1
  4. Luis Fernando Díaz Vilela 1
  5. María Rosa Isla Díaz 1
  6. María Dolores Díaz Cabrera 1
  1. 1 Universidad de La Laguna

    Universidad de La Laguna

    San Cristobal de La Laguna, España

    GRID grid.10041.34

Revista de psicología del trabajo y de las organizaciones = Journal of work and organizational psychology

ISSN: 1576-5962

Année de publication: 2018

Volumen: 34

Número: 2

Pages: 63-68

Type: Article

Exporter: RIS
DOI: 10.5093/jwop2018a8 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAccès ouvert editor
Texte intégral de l'auteur: lockAccès ouvert editor


The main purpose of this paper was to analyse the predictive role of personality, self-efficacy, and impression management on contextual performance in academic settings. A sample of 223 university students voluntarily answered a battery of tests on-line. Results showed that conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness, as well as self-efficacy, predict contextual performance self-evaluations. Furthermore, the significant interaction between conscientiousness and selfefficacy multiplies their influence. Besides, impression management contributes to predicting contextual performance, but did not interact with the remaining variables. Results related to personality and self-efficacy are consistent with those found in work settings.

Références bibliographiques

  • Ato, M., López, J. J., & Benavente, A. (2013). Un sistema de clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología. Anales de Psicología, 29, 1038-1059.
  • Baessler, J., & Schwarcer, R. (1996). Evaluación de la autoeficacia: Adaptación española de la escala de autoeficacia general. Ansiedad y Estrés, 2, 1-8.
  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
  • Bandura, A., & Locke, E. A. (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 87-99. https://doi. org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.87
  • Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
  • Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 9-30.
  • Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2004). Influence of teacher empowerment on teachers’ organizational commitment, professional commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 277-289.
  • Bolino, M. C. (1999). Citizenship and impression management: Good soldiers or good actors? Academy of Management Review, 24, 82-98.
  • Bolino, M. C., Kacmar, K. M., Turnley, W. H., & Gilstrap, J. B. (2008). A multi-level review of impression management motives and behaviors. Journal of Management, 34, 1080-1109. https://doi. org/10.1177/0149206308324325
  • Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt & W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71-98). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
  • Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 87, 99-109.
  • Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2003). Personality predicts academic performance: Evidence from two longitudinal studies on British University students. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 319338.
  • Chen, C. V., & Kao, R. (2011). A multilevel study on the relationships between work characteristics, self-efficacy, collective efficacy, and organizational citizenship behavior: The case of Taiwanese police duty-executing organizations. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 145, 361-390. 0223980.2011.574168
  • Chiaburu, D. S., Oh, I.-S., Berry, C. M., Li, N., & Gardner, R. G. (2011). The Five-Factor Model of personality traits and organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 11401166.
  • Coleman, V. I., & Borman, W. C. (2000). Investigating the underlying structure of the citizenship performance domain. Human Resource Management Review, 10, 25-44.
  • Conard, M. A. (2006). Aptitude is not enough: How personality and behavior predict academic performance. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 339-346.
  • Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
  • Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). From catalog to classification: Murray’s needs and the five-factor model. Journal of Personal and Social Psychology, 55, 258-265.
  • Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Professional Manual: Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor-Inventory (NEO-FFI). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
  • Díaz-Vilela, L., Díaz-Cabrera, D., Isla-Díaz, R., Hernández-Fernaud, E., & RosalesSánchez, C. (2012). Spanish adaptation of the citizenship performance questionnaire by Coleman y Borman (2000) and an analysis of the empiric structure of the construct. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y las Organizaciones, 28, 135-149.
  • Gerhardt, M. W., Rode, J. C., & Peterson, S. J. (2007). Exploring mechanisms in the personalityperformance relationship: Mediating roles of selfmanagement and situational constraints. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1344-1355.
  • Haworth, C. L., & Levy, P. E. (2001). The importance of instrumentality beliefs in the prediction of organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 64-75. jvbe.2000.1784
  • Hogan, J., & Roberts, B.W. (1996). Issues and nonissues in the fidelity/ bandwidth trade off. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 627-637.;2-F
  • Hogan, J., Rybicki, S. L., Motowidlo, S. J., & Borman, W. C. (1998). Relations between contextual performance, personality, and occupational advancement. Human Performance, 11, 189-207. 80/08959285.1998.9668031
  • Hurtz, G. M., & Donovan, J. J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 869-879. https://
  • Ilies, R., Fulmer, I. S., Spitzmuller, M., & Johnson, M. D. (2009). Personality and citizenship behavior: The mediating role of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 945959. a0013329
  • Ingold, P., Kleinmann, M., Konig, C., & Melchers, K. (2014). Shall we continue or stop disapproving of self-presentation? Evidence on impression management and faking in a selection context and their relation to job performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24, 420-432.
  • Judge, T. A., & Ilies, R. (2002). Relationship of personality to performance motivation: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 797-807.
  • Judge, T. A., Jackson, C. L., Shaw, J. C., Scott, B. A., & Rich, B. L. (2007). Selfefficacy and work-related performance: The integral role of individual differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 107-127. https://doi. org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.107
  • Klein, H. J., & Lee, S. (2006). The effects of personality on learning: The mediating role of goal setting. Human Performance, 19, 43-66. https://
  • Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., Schmeck, R. R., & Avdic, A. (2011). The Big Five personality traits, learning styles, and academic achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 472-477. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.04.019
  • LePine, J. A., & Van Dyne, L. (2001). Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: Evidence of differential relationships with big five personality characteristics and cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 326-336 https://doi. org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.2.326
  • Motowidlo, S. J., Borman, W. C., & Schmit, M. J. (1997). A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance. Human Performance, 10, 71-83.
  • O’Connor, M. C., & Paunonen, S. V. (2007). Big Five personality predictors of post-secondary academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 971-990.
  • Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Reiss, A. D. (1996). Role of social desirability in personality testing for personnel selection: The red herring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 660-679.
  • Oren, L., Tziner, A., Nahshon, Y., & Sharoni, G. (2013). Relations between ocbs, organizational justice, work motivation and self-efficacy. Amfiteatru Economic, 15, 34, 505-516.
  • Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48, 775-802. tb01781.x
  • Padilla, J. L., Acosta, B., Guevara, M., Gómez, J., & González, A. (2006). Propiedades psicométricas de la versión española de la escala de autoeficacia general aplicada en México y España. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 23, 245-252.
  • Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598-609.
  • Paulhus, D. L. (2002). Socially desirable responding: The evolution of a construct. In H. I. Braun & D. N. Jackson (Eds.), Role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement (pp. 49-69). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322-338.
  • Poropat, A. E. (2011). The Eysenckian personality factors and their correlations with academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 41-58.
  • Rosse, J. G., Stecher, M. D., Miller, J. L., & Levin, R. A. (1998). The impact of response distortion on preemployment personality testing and hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 634-644. https://doi. org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.4.634
  • Salgado, J. F. (1997). The five-factor model of personality and job performance in the European Community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 30-43.
  • Salgado, J. F. (2005). Personalidad y deseabilidad social en contextos organizacionales: Implicaciones para la práctica de la Psicología del trabajo y las organizaciones. Papeles del Psicólogo, 26, 115-128.
  • Sanjuán, P., Pérez, A., & Bermúdez, J. (2000). Escala de autoeficacia general: Datos psicométricos de la adaptación para población española. Psicothema, 12, 509-513.
  • Schmitt, N. W., Oswald, F. L., Kim, B. H., Imus, A. L., Merritt, S. M., Friede, A. J., & Shivpuri, S. (2007). The use of background and ability profiles to predict college student outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 165-179.
  • Schneider, R. J., Hough, L. M., & Dunnette, M. D. (1996), Broadsided by broad traits: How to sink science in five dimensions or less. Journal Organizational Behavior, 17, 639-655. (SICI)1099-1379(199611)17:6<639::AID-JOB3828>3.0.CO;2-9
  • Shaffer, J. A., & Postlethwaite, B. E. (2013). The validity of conscientiousness for predicting job performance: A meta-analytic test of two hypotheses. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 21, 183-199. https://
  • Small, E. E., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2006). The impact of contextual selfratings and observer ratings of personality on the personalityperformance relationship. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 297-320.
  • Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-663.
  • Snyder, M. (1979). Self-monitoring processes. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 85-128). New York, NY: Academic Press.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1989). Using multivariate statistics. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
  • Tabak, F., Nguyen, N., Basuray, T., & Darrow, W. (2009). Exploring the impact of personality on performance: How time-on-task moderates the mediation by self-efficacy. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 823-828.
  • Todd, S. Y., & Kent, A. (2006). Direct and indirect effects of task characteristics on organizational citizenship behavior. North American Journal of Psychology, 8, 253-268.
  • Van Scotter, J. R., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1996). Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as separate facets of contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 525-531.
  • Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2000). Perspectives on models of job performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8, 216-226.
  • Viswesvaran, C., Ones, D. S., & Hough (2001). Do Impression Management Scales in Personality Inventories Predict Managerial Job Performance Ratings? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 277289.
  • Whitman, D. S., Van Rooy, D. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2010). Satisfaction, citizenship behaviors, and performance in work units: A meta-analysis of collective construct relations. Personnel Psychology, 63, 41-81.
  • Yun, S., Takeuchi, R., & Liu, W. (2007). Employee self-enhancement motives and job performance behaviors: Investigating the moderating effects of employee role ambiguity and managerial perceptions of employee commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 745-756. https://doi. org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.745