The consequences of work-family conflict for both individuals and organizations have been well documented, and the various sources of such conflict have received substantial attention. However, the vast majority of extant research has focused on only time- and strain-based sources, largely neglecting behavior-based sources. Integrating two nationally representative databases, the authors examine 3 behavior-based antecedents of work-family conflict linked specifically to occupational work role requirements (interdependence, responsibility for others, and interpersonal conflict). Results from multilevel analysis indicate that significant variance in work-family conflict is attributable to the occupation in which someone works. Interdependence and responsibility for others predict work-family conflict, even after controlling for several time- and strain-based sources.

Longitudinal data from 338 individuals across 64 teams in a simulationbased team-training context were used to examine the effects of dispositional goal orientation on self-regulated learning (self-efficacy and metacognition). Team goal orientation compositions, as reflected by average goal orientations of team members, were examined for moderating effects on these individual-level relationships. Finally, individual-level self-regulation was investigated for its influence on multiple team-level outcomes across time. Results showed generally positive effects of learning goal orientation and negative effects of avoid performance and prove performance goal orientations on rates of self-regulation during team training. However, several of these individual-level relationships were moderated by team goal orientation composition. The importance of self-regulation in teams was displayed by results showing the average level of self-regulation among a team's members over time was positively associated with team efficacy, team cooperation quality, and team decision making.

Recent scholarship on citizenship behavior demonstrates that engaging too often in these behaviors comes at the expense of task performance. In order to examine the boundary conditions of this relationship, we used resource allocation and social exchange theories to build predictions regarding moderators of the curvilinear association between citizenship and task performance. We conducted a field study of 366 employees, in which we examined the relationship between the frequency of interpersonal helping behavior and task performance and tested for the moderating influences of 3 social context features (social density, interdependence, and social support) and of employees' levels of interpersonal skill. Results provided corroborating evidence of the diminishing returns between citizenship and task performance. Further, these diminishing returns were decelerated when contexts were characterized by high interdependence and social density and when employees possessed strong interpersonal skills. Implications for extending future citizenship theory and research to incorporate curvilinearity are presented.

The purpose of this study was to take an inductive approach in examining the extent to which organizational contexts represent significant sources of variance in supervisor performance ratings, and to explore various factors that may explain contextual rating variability. Using archival field performance rating data from a large state law enforcement organization, we used a multilevel modeling approach to partition the variance in ratings due to ratees, raters, as well as rating contexts. Results suggest that much of what may often be interpreted as idiosyncratic rater variance, may actually reflect systematic rating variability across contexts. In addition, performance-related and non-performance factors including contextual rating tendencies accounted for significant rating variability. Supervisor ratings represent the most common approach for measuring job performance, and understanding the nature and sources of rating variability is important for research and practice. Given the many uses of performance rating data, our findings suggest that continuing to identify contextual sources of variability is particularly important for addressing criterion problems, and improving ratings as a form of performance measurement.