Summary
Using conservation of resources theory, we challenge traditional unity of command models of leadership and propose that a dual‐leadership framework can serve as a potential solution to the inherent challenges of innovation. Leading for innovation demands are depicted as uniquely disparate from other forms of leadership, resulting in several types of conflict and resource depletion for individual leaders. We contend that this exploration–exploitation role conflict and the resulting need to manage incongruent role identities produce stress, strain, and resource depletion that in turn hamper innovative goal achievement for both a single leader directly and via subordinates more indirectly. We propose, however, that as an extension of the resource investment tenet of the conservation of resources theory, a dual‐leadership approach may alleviate many of these challenges for innovation. Specifically, the addition of a second leader can add resources to innovation and in turn decrease the role conflict inherent in managing the generation and implementation of creative ideas. Limitations and areas for future research are offered.
Cyberpsychology is a recently emergent field that examines the impact of technology upon human cognition and behavior. Given its infancy, authors have rapidly created new measures to gauge their constructs of interest. Unfortunately, few of these authors have had the opportunity to test their scales' psychometric properties and validity. This is concerning, as many theoretical assumptions may be founded upon scales with inadequate attributes. If this were found to be true, then previous findings in cyberpsychology studies would need to be retested, and future research would need to shift its focus to creating psychometrically sound and valid measures. To provide inferences on this concern, the current study examines the article reporting, scale creation, and scale reliabilities of every article published in Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking from its inception to July 2014. The final data set encompassed the coding of 1,478 individual articles, including 921 scales, and spanning 17 years. The results demonstrate that the simple survey methodology has become more popular over time. Authors are gradually applying empirically tested scales. However, self-created measures are still the most popular, leading to concerns about the measures' validity. Also, the use of multi-item measures has increased over time, but many articles still fail to report adequate information to assess the reliability of the applied scales. Lastly, the average scale reliability is 0.81, which barely meets standard cutoffs. Overall, these results are not overly concerning, but suggestions are given on methods to improve the reporting of measures, the creation of scales, and the state of cyberpsychology.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.