SummaryResearch on work aggression or anger has typically focused on supervisors and co-workers as the instigators of aggression; however, aggressive customers are also likely and may have unique consequences for the employee. We explore this phenomenon with a sample of 198 call center employees at two work sites. The employees reported that customer verbal aggression occurred 10 times a day, on average, though this varied by race and negative affectivity. Using LISREL, our data indicated that both the frequency and stress appraisal of customer aggression positively related to emotional exhaustion, and this burnout dimension mediated the relationship of stress appraisal with absences. Stress appraisal also influenced employees' emotion regulation strategies with their most recent hostile caller. Employees who felt more threatened by customer aggression used surface acting or vented emotions, while those who were less threatened used deep acting. Job autonomy helped explain who found these events more stressful, and implications of these results are discussed.

No abstract

Although reviewing dental students' clinical competency assessments is an important aspect of instruction, finding time to give individual feedback to each student poses a challenge for faculty members, and some students may prefer to receive feedback from a peer. The aim of this study was to explore dental students' perceived value of feedback on their performance in a simulated patient care activity from either a faculty member or a peer. Participants were third‐ and fourth‐year dental students who had completed two years of interprofessional instruction and a videotaped objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) with standardized patients. Participants in two cohorts were randomly assigned to a faculty or peer feedback group. Cohort one (2015‐16) consisted of 66 students: 21 in faculty‐led groups, and 45 in peer‐led groups. Cohort two (2017) consisted of 60 students: 17 in faculty‐led groups, and 43 in peer‐led groups. In both types of pairings, the protocol consisted of jointly observing a video recording of student performance in the simulated patient encounter and discussing questions about the student's performance in non‐technical competencies such as communication, patient safety, scope of practice, and conflict resolution. For cohort two, prior to the feedback sessions, students in the peer feedback groups received a 60‐minute training on providing constructive feedback. All 126 students in the two cohorts completed an evaluation questionnaire after the experience. The results showed that students in both types of feedback sessions perceived value in the feedback and believed it enhanced their skills. However, students rated faculty feedback significantly higher (p<0.05) than peer feedback on nearly all dimensions. Perceived value did not differ by age, gender, class year, or OSCE performance. These results provide support for the value of peer feedback on nontechnical clinical competency assessments, though not as a substitute for faculty feedback.

Theoretical arguments and analyses from 2 studies provide compelling evidence that computerized measures of information-processing skills and abilities are highly useful supplements to more traditional, paper-based measures of general mental ability for predicting individuals' capacity to learn from and perform on highly challenging, multifaceted tutors. These tutors were designed to emulate learning and performance in complex, real-world settings. Hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis provided evidence that a general, higher order factor model with general ability at the apex could quite adequately and singularly account for the individual-differences data, both traditional and cognitive-process measures. Results are interpreted in light of the utility and generality of human cognitive abilities.

In response to the call for tools to measure collaboration in interprofessional settings, an Ambulatory Team Observed Structured Clinical Evaluation (ATOSCE) was developed to measure collaboration/teamwork behaviors and skills in a realistic simulation for graduate students in the healthcare professions. Participants rated the ATOSCE a realistic and valuable learning experience.