[Solved] Research psych smoking study

Assignment Prompt & Instructions

– 2 years ago

**files (1)**

– ## psych350week1.docx

**## psych350week1.docx**

Read the hypothetical study and discuss any problems you find with the way in which the study was conducted, the author's conclusions, or the way in which the article was written.

**Effect of Smoking on Management Performance**

**Winston Butts Vantage University**

In recent years, many organizations have implemented programs to encourage employees to stop smoking (Ash, 1971). This movement toward decreasing smoking in the workplace is an attempt to reduce health care costs as well as satisfy the rights of nonsmokers (Butts, 1975).

However, research on the effects of these programs is mixed. Whereas some studies support the idea of financial savings (e.g., Stogie, 1970), others have shown no improvements in employee health or increases in organizational profits. Because of this lack of consistency, it is the purpose of the present study to determine if smoking might actually increase performance.

Method

**Participants**

    The participants in the study were 15 managers employed by a large manufacturer of munitions and blasting caps. Eight of the managers smoked at work, and seven of the managers were nonsmokers. Ten of the managers were women and five were men. The mean age of the managers was 36.3, with the youngest being 21 and the oldest 65.

Procedure

    The experimenter spent 10 days at the organization observing the 15 managers. Each time a manager did something right, he was given a point. Each time a manager did something wrong, a point was deducted. At the end of the 10 days, a manager's performance was determined by his total number of points.

Results and Discussion

     The managers' performance scores were correlated with their smoking status. The results of this analysis indicated a correlation coefficient of .20. Though the correlation coefficient was not statistically significant, it was in the predicted direction. In other words, managers who smoked performed better than those who did not. Thus, the results of this study indicate that smoking causes better managerial performance.

     One reason for this finding might be that smoking allows a manager to calm down when he is anxious, thus resulting in better performance (Puffer, 1971). Another reason might be that smoking is a sign of status and maturity (Burns, 1978) and good managers smoke to enhance their image. On the basis of the results of this study, organizations should either hire managers who smoke or get their nonsmoking managers to start smoking.

**## psych350week1.docx**

Read the hypothetical study and discuss any problems you find with the way in which the study was conducted, the author's conclusions, or the way in which the article was written.

**Effect of Smoking on Management Performance**

**Winston Butts Vantage University**

In recent years, many organizations have implemented programs to encourage employees to stop smoking (Ash, 1971). This movement toward decreasing smoking in the workplace is an attempt to reduce health care costs as well as satisfy the rights of nonsmokers (Butts, 1975).

However, research on the effects of these programs is mixed. Whereas some studies support the idea of financial savings (e.g., Stogie, 1970), others have shown no improvements in employee health or increases in organizational profits. Because of this lack of consistency, it is the purpose of the present study to determine if smoking might actually increase performance.

Method

**Participants**

    The participants in the study were 15 managers employed by a large manufacturer of munitions and blasting caps. Eight of the managers smoked at work, and seven of the managers were nonsmokers. Ten of the managers were women and five were men. The mean age of the managers was 36.3, with the youngest being 21 and the oldest 65.

Procedure

    The experimenter spent 10 days at the organization observing the 15 managers. Each time a manager did something right, he was given a point. Each time a manager did something wrong, a point was deducted. At the end of the 10 days, a manager's performance was determined by his total number of points.

Results and Discussion

     The managers' performance scores were correlated with their smoking status. The results of this analysis indicated a correlation coefficient of .20. Though the correlation coefficient was not statistically significant, it was in the predicted direction. In other words, managers who smoked performed better than those who did not. Thus, the results of this study indicate that smoking causes better managerial performance.

     One reason for this finding might be that smoking allows a manager to calm down when he is anxious, thus resulting in better performance (Puffer, 1971). Another reason might be that smoking is a sign of status and maturity (Burns, 1978) and good managers smoke to enhance their image. On the basis of the results of this study, organizations should either hire managers who smoke or get their nonsmoking managers to start smoking.