Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament

How to Write a 5-Paragraph Essay on Culture of Poverty

How to Write a 5-Paragraph Essay on Culture of Poverty The conclusion is often one of the more challenging aspects to illustrate for any academic paper, including one on the culture of poverty. The body is often the easiest part to complete but it must be framed with the conclusion and the introduction in order to bridge the ideas for the reader. Just the same way as an introduction functions as the bridge to transport the reader from their lives into the analysis, your conclusion has to be a bridge to help the readers transition themselves back from your analysis into their daily lives. This type of confusion will help readers to see why the analysis and information you have included should matter to them after they have finished reading the paper. Your conclusion for a paper on the culture of poverty affords you the opportunity to have the final say on your subject. The conclusion lets you cover the issues you raised, synthesize your thoughts, and demonstrate the importance of the ideas that you presented. It is also a final opportunity for you to make a good impression with your readers. The conclusion on the culture of poverty can go beyond the confines of your writing assignment. This is where you can push the boundaries of your prompt and consider broader issues, make new connections between your subject matter and the bigger picture, and elaborate on the importance of your findings. Strategies for Writing an Effective Conclusion If you are struggling with your conclusion consider the following writing strategies: If you cannot find an interesting way to make your conclusion on the culture of poverty be informative to the reader, ask yourself why your friend or your teacher or any reader should care in the first place. This would help you figure out why what you were saying is important. This will help you to better develop your ideas. Return to some of the aspect that you’ve had in your introduction on the culture of poverty. This is a strategy that helps to bring your reader full circle and perfectly frame your arguments. It functions as proof that your paper was helpful in cultivating a better understanding for the reader. You can also use the conclusion to refer to your introductory paragraph by integrating parallel images, keywords or concepts that you presented in the introduction. Synthesize but do not summarize the themes you’ve included into your essay on the culture of poverty. You want to include a brief summary of the main points you presented in your paper but not simply repeat them. Instead you want to show the reader how these points and the examples relate with each other. Point out the broader implications of your work on the culture of poverty. A paper and that shows how your exploration adds to the bigger picture will be much more effective. With these simple guidelines you should shape your 5-paragraph essay the way it’s supposed to be. You may also check our 11 facts on culture of poverty as well as 20 topics and 1 sample essay on this subject.

Infernal Affairs Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Infernal Affairs - Essay Example Plot Synopsis Infernal Affairs involves the story of the two main characters, Chan and Lau, who are both connected to the Hong Kong triad and who both enlisted to the cadet academy. The story opens with the introduction of Hon as the triad’s leader who sends his recruits to a police academy to serve as a mole or spy in espionage language. The main characters, Chan and Lau, join the academy, but the former was expelled despite displaying a remarkable wit in the institution. Chan permanently joined the triad, while Lau entered the police force and performed excellently. The highlight of the movie reveals when police superintendent Wong led an operation intercepting the cocaine deal of the triad. The information of the cocaine deal came from Chan, who later in the film was revealed as having communication with Superintendent Wong. Lau, on one hand, sends a message to Hon regarding the operation using Morse codes. The operation yields Hon’s determination to win over Wong. T he story goes on with Lau’s dilemma over his allegiance to both the police force and to his role as a mole of the triad. ... Everything went okay between the two, when Chan discovered that Lau is the mole he is looking for. The tragic ending came when Chan was killed by Inspector B, a mole as well who equally feeds the gang with insider information. In the end, Chan is revealed as an undercover officer while Lau gives a salute to Chan in his funeral, and vows to forget his negative past and be a good cop. Themes The theme of the movie mainly revolves around a duality of character among individual actors that are cloaked around a web of deceit, pretension and lies. As the movie progresses, the director was able to convey the central theme using many ways, such as the multiple personality of characters introduced in the novel currently written by Lau’s girlfriend and the mystery as to what the real persona of the main characters is. Furthermore, the mystery unfolds as the movie creatively and suspensely depicts how the lives of the two main characters are tangled, and how living in lies became gradual ly their reality. In the words of Ebert (par. 9), pretension and lies as themes would not be enough justifications to watch the film; rather, the mind and conscience-provoking question as to how living in a persona that is totally different from the real person could be possible. In the end, it is just a matter of reclaiming the real self by spilling the beans, telling the truth, and facing the consequences, no matter how undesirable the outcome may be. Visual Elements: Angling and Shots, Lighting, Costumes and Set Locations Infernal Affairs really deserves an A when it comes to cinematography. In fact, a lot of movie critics are all-praised when it comes to the crispness of the shots, the

Comparing Rawls and Hayek Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Comparing Rawls and Hayek - Essay Example Hayek highlights that freedom entailed acting on an individual’s own free will and not on the will or command of others or situations. He covers all the types of freedom that he experienced in the First World War that is political freedom, personal freedom and economic freedom. On the other hand, John Rawls was a philosopher who originated from America and fought or participated in the Second World War. He was responsible for developing the theory of justice which was a concept of ethical, rationality, law, equity and fairness (Bellamy). Rawls argues that justice is fairness and the same justice is responsible for the existence of liberty within the society. Rawls believes that for social institutions to be operational or function properly, justice is necessary in forming the foundations, defining the base and also veiling the position of ignorance within the society. Hayek and Rawls both supported liberalism in their different writings and speech. They talked in unison that p eople were free to exercise their ideas without barriers as long as their idea were not ill motivated or malicious in any way and that the state was there to support them and ensure that their rights, that is of freedom of speech, were practiced and equally enjoyed by all individuals from different classes, ages, ethnical backgrounds and races. Hayek and Rawls both agreed that the government was created for the citizens, by the citizens and to serve the citizens and rebuffed other notion of the other way round that the citizens were meant to serve the government. They were both liberal as they preached the principles of justice, freedom and equality to the public as they both advocated for basic rights such like education, food, shelter, medication and clothing to all citizens. Both Hayek and Rawls were using the society as their main source of reference in their various thoughts and intransient differences, thereby making the citizens the centre of their struggles for freedom and j ustice. This is as per what they experienced in world war one and world war two respectively. The various ideas they tried to put in action were all directed towards the unification of their different ideologies, in favor of the citizens, on how things are done or should be carried out within the society (Hayek 78). Both Hayek and Rawls place emphasis on Rawls theory of the veil of ignorance intended to make us blind to our unique differences as human beings. They both campaign on the interests of democracy as they try to shun the inhabitants of a strong and peacefully democracy. They both argue that in the interest of democracy, ideologies should be placed together to accommodate the different thoughts and lifestyles of individuals coming from different backgrounds and possessing different ideologies in the society. This is because the society consists if unique human beings with unique qualities, backgrounds, class and preferences. However, Rawls and Hayek do not come to an agreem ent thus do not resolve their arguments in order to find solutions and how solutions are reached in different situations. In fact, they completely clash and each has their own viewpoint of the solution to their matching theories and ideologies. Rawls argues that agreements on particular matters can be reached whereas Hayek does not believe that this can happen. Hayek believes that the

Health promotion initiative Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Health promotion initiative - Essay Example It should be noted that the area is crime prone and incidences of drug abuse are very common. According to records, a portion of the population shared needles from intravenous drug use and there is widespread homosexual promiscuity. In the 1990s, the Belle Glade community had the highest HIV/AIDS prevalence rate in the United States. The AIDS scourge is widespread in the entire area cutting across all the major demographics of Hispanics and Black Americans. One of the reasons for the high AIDS prevalence rate is the sharing of needles used in intravenous drug injections. The high risk people include drug users who are also engaged in promiscuity. Lack of knowledge and information about AIDS contributes to the high prevalence rates in the region especially among the gay people. These high risk people are not equipped with the right information on AIDS and therefore inadvertently put themselves and the entire community at a high risk of infection. It is therefore important to undertake a health promotion initiative in Belle Glade community so as to curb the issue of HIV/AIDS. Notably, measures have to be put in place to ensure that new infection cases are eliminated and those that are infected get the right information to live in a healthy manner. It is also important to note that the use of drugs and high rates of promiscuity play a major role in the spread of HIV/AIDS in the Belle Glade community. Therefore, the health promotion is intended to cover the whole spectrum of HIV/AIDS spread and infection management. According to the Ottawa Charter (1986), health promotion is based on the social ecological factors that determine the health of the society. Health promotion initiatives aim at mobilizing resources for good health. It should be noted that health promotion is salute-genetic and it involves a multi sectoral approach. Based on the Ottawa

Treatments for Metronidazole-Resistant Giardiasis A Review

Treatments for Metronidazole-Resistant Giardiasis A Review Nicole Wagner Abstract Giardiasis is a protozoal infection and a health issue in many parts of the world for both humans and animals. Giardia spp. Are responsible for diarrheal diseases, and current treatments are not consistently effective due to the development of drug resistance. The common drugs used to treat the parasite often have undesirable side effects. New drugs, drugs previously used for other conditions, and natural remedies are all being investigated for use in treating giardiasis and reducing Giardia numbers. The mode-of-action and potency of these alternative treatments give insight into new therapies, although more research is needed. Introduction Protozoal Giardia spp. Occur in two forms, a motile, flagellated trophozoite, and a resistant cyst. The motile trophozoite adheres to the intestinal wall of its host, while the cyst form is passed in the hosts feces then re-ingested in another host (Hendrix and Robinson 2012). It is now suspected that Giardia is species specific and the human forms are included in the Giardia lamblia assemblage and include Giardia intestinalis and Giardia duodenalis (Hendrix and Robinson 2012). Giardiasis is caused by a protozoal parasite that is responsible for health issues worldwide in humans and animals. In humans, the parasite is responsible for approximately 184 million cases of giardiasis each year (Hart et al. 2015). In animals, it has been found that in North America some herds of dairy calves have the parasite in 100% of the animals, and in Australia, the most common enteric parasite of dogs is a species of Giardia (Thompson. 2000). Signs and symptoms of giardiasis include chronic and acute diarrhea and vomiting (Hart et al. 2015). These significant intestinal diseases can decrease appetite, cause malabsorption, malnutrition and even death (El-Taweed 2015). And because this parasite is found in domesticated animals, there is a significant zoonotic transmission potential (Thompson. 2000). A calf can shed 105 to 106 cysts per gram of feces, and re-infection can occur with ingesting as few as 10 cysts. As the Giardia cysts survive well in water there is a potential f or contamination of untreated water supply as well (Thompson 2000 and Watkins and Eckmann 2014). There is no vaccine available for Giardia, so the treatment of the disease involves drug therapy, like the antibiotic metronidazole, a 5-nitroimadazole class drug (Watkins and Eckmann 2014 and Hart et al. 2017). Other drugs of this class are also used to treat giardiasis with varying degrees of success. However, like many antibiotics some drug resistance has been found (Watkins and Eckmann 2014). Several studies demonstrate Giardia spp. resistance to the 5-nitroimadazole class of drugs, including one that recorded 22% of patients in a clinic in Spain receiving treatment for giardiasis did not respond to metronidazole (El-Taweed 2015). Perhaps contributing to the problem of emerging drug resistance, are the undesirable side effects of common antiprotozoal drugs. Some of these side effects include intestinal discomfort, flatulence, nausea, vomiting, and the metallic taste of the drugs (Sahib et al. 2014). It is human nature to stop using a drug with these side effects as soon as it seems to be working, and this leads to the potential for an increase in 5-nitroimidazole drug resistance over time. Also, the use of the 5-nitromadazole class drugs at lower doses for treating gingivitis and pre-surgical colorectal cases, may allow for the growth of drug-resistant forms of Giardia (El-Taweed et al. 2015). Research into how Giardia become resistant to metronidazole and the active components of other successful drugs is important to the success of treating giardiasis in humans and animals. The investigations into different drugs and herbal remedies involve identifying the mode-of-action, how the active component is effectiv e against this protozoan in both trophozoites and cyst form (Galeh et al. 2016). As an alternative to metronidazole, older antibiotic drugs, new antibiotic drugs and plant extracts and essential oils are being considered by many researchers. Newer drugs are being considered to overcome Giardia resistance like auranofin, a drug currently prescribed for rheumatoid arthritis (Watkins and Eckmann 2014.). Researchers are also considering plants and plant extracts for a new anti-giardia agent. These extracts have been used in traditional medicine to treat diarrhea in places in South America, India, Iran, and Turkey where Giardia is endemic (Watkins and Eckmann 2014). Research has been done investigating compounds from garlic (Mikaili et al. 2014), ginger and cinnamon (Mahmoud et al. 2014), pomegranate (Al-Megrin 2017), and native plants from Brazil (Martins et al. 2015), the Yucatan (Sergio et al. 2005) and their effectiveness against Giardia. Identifying the compounds in the plants that are most effective against the protozoa will provide another option for treatment of giardiasis. Drug Therapies As previously mentioned, the number of cases of Metronidazole-resistant giardiasis is growing. Other 5-nitroimadazole and nitro-class drugs have been tested against Giardia like nitazoxanide and furazolidone (Watkins and Eckmann 2014). These drugs work by reducing the nitrogen group on the drug compounds to activate toxic free radicals. The advantages of the new drugs are shorter length of treatment and reduced cellular damage to the liver and kidneys (Jarrad et al 2016). Side effects are seen in the use of these drugs, as in the case of furazolidone, where some hemolysis was observed in some patients (Watkins and Eckmann 2014) and in 5-nitroimadazole drugs side effects like nausea, vomiting and headaches are reported (Jarrad et al. 2016). When developing new drug treatments, researchers investigate how the parasite is developing resistance to current treatments. In the case of 5-nitroimodazole drugs, the potency of a substance against Giardia species is due to the activation of the drug by an enzyme pyruvate ferredoxin oxidoreductase (PFOR). The drugs nitro group is reduced by the protozoans PFOR enzyme, producing toxic free radicals which bond to target molecules in the microbe, inactivating them and killing the parasite (Watkins and Eckmann 2014). The resistant protozoans have down-regulated the PFOR enzyme (Jarrad et al. 2016 and Galeh et al. 2016). To treat giardiasis, research has focused on this nitro group and the formation of toxic free radicals. Other drugs are being developed that incorporate a benzene ring, instead of (or in addition to) the nitro groups. These drugs act on the Giardia cellular vesicles, causing swelling, and are more effective than nitazoxanide and metronidazole (Watkins and Eckmann 2014) . Not all research has resulted in support for the development of new drugs in the 5-nitromiadazole class. In a study conducted in Iran, researchers tested the theory in human clinical studies, utilizing PCR to identify genetic mutations that appeared in metronidazole-resistant Giardia lamblia. In the metronidazole-resistant G. lamblia, the protozoa did not show down regulation of PFOR and it is suspected that other predisposing factors were responsible for the drugs ineffectiveness(Galeh et al. 2016). Further research is being done to test the new drugs like nitroimidazole and furazolidone for cytotoxicity towards human liver, kidney, and intestinal cells (Watkins and Eckmann 2014). These side effects can be serious in immune-compromised subjects and children. Older antibiotic drugs like albendazole and mebendazole, benzimidazole class drugs, have been shown to be effective against Giardia as well. These drugs are currently used to treat roundworm infections. The benzimidazole class drugs act by binding to tubulin and interfering with the protozoan cytoskeleton (Watkins and Eckmann, 2014). Research into the effectiveness of metronidazole and albendazole in mice showed that some Giardia isolates developed resistance to one or the other drug and in some cases both drugs (Lemà ©e et al. 2000). In the case of albendazole, some Giardia duodenalis resistance developed in a mouse model (Lemà ©e et al. 2000). In another study in Bolivia when albendazole was used to reduce the hookworm infection, the number of Giardia infections increased showing some (Watkins and Eckmann 2014). Drug research of existing drug libraries has also revealed some drugs that previously were not used as antimicrobials are effective against Giardia. A drug used for rheumatoid arthritis, auranofin, inhibits the growth of metronidazole-resistant Giardia. It works by inhibiting the thioredoxin-glutathione reductase enzyme (Watkins and Eckmann 2014). A drug used for obesity treatment, orlistat, which is poorly absorbed, is active in the intestine. Orlistat works by inhibiting lipases in Giardia isolates, preventing lipid metabolism (Watkins and Eckmann 2014). Ginger and Cinnamon Current research into metronidazole-resistant Giardia infections has gone beyond investigating new drugs or existing drug libraries. Diarrheal treatments around the world have shown promise in providing avenues for new giardiasis therapies and treatments. Some of this research involves the investigation into anti-nausea spices, ginger and cinnamon. Research has been conducted using ginger extracts in both in vivo and in vitro studies. In an in vitro study (Abdel-Hafeez et al. 2016), a comparison was made between gingers and nitazoxanides effectiveness against Giardia lamblia trophozoites. Ginger was chosen to contrast with the drug because of its historical use as an anti-nausea and anti-diarrheal treatment. Ginger extract is an antioxidant with alkaloids, saponins, tannins, and flavonoids. It is suspected that either the antioxidant or flavonoids have a negative effect on the trophozoites (Mahmoud et al. 2014). A study investigated curcumin, an antioxidant, also found in Zingiber officinale and other pungent spices (Perrez-Arriaga et al. 2006) showed that in the presence of curcumin at concentrations similar to metronidazole, significant swelling was seen in the Giardia trophozoites, indicating possible cell membrane interference (Perrez-Arriaga et al. 2006). In the research conducted by Abdel-Hafeez et al. (2016), cultured fecal samples treated with ginger extract at 20mg/mL resulted in similar reduction of the number of viable trophozoites in the culture as nitazoxanide. The findings were based on counts of viable trophozoites (pear-shaped, mobile, and non-refractory quality) under a light microscope. Verification of findings may use in vivo studies with mice or rats, and improved counting and staining techniques are indicated for future research. Meanwhile, ginger continues to be used for a variety of intestinal infections in Thailand, India, and Egypt (Abdel-Hafeez et al. 2016). In the in vivo study by Mahmoud, et al (2014)., cinnamon was also evaluated against Giardia trophozoites and cysts. As stated previously, the cyst is found in fecal samples as a transmissible form. The researchers This study involved using Giardia lamblia cyst infected rats and measured doses of ginger at 10 and 20 mg/kg/day and cinnamon at 10 and 20 mg/kg/day. As Perrez-Arriaga et al. (2006) previously researched, active compounds in ginger may affect the protozoans cell membrane. In another study, Proanthocyanidins were identified as an active compound in cinnamon (Williams et al. 2015). Proanthocyanidins, also found in berries, disrupt protozoans adhesive ability which is necessary for the trophozoite to maintain its position in the intestine (Anthony et al. 2007). In the Mahmoud study (2014) the rats were euthanized and their intestines washed for a measurement of trophozoites and to determine intestinal damage (Anthony et al. 2007). Their stools were also collected for three day s prior to euthanasia to perform a count of cysts excreted (Mahmoud et al. 2014). According to the results of this study, cinnamon given to the rats at the 20 mg/kg dose resulted in a 100% reduction in the number of cysts found in their fecals, and a 34% reduction in the number of trophozoites. When rats were given a dose of 20mg/kg of ginger the number of cysts found in their stool was reduced by 90.1% and the number of trophozoites in the intestinal wash was reduced by 75.45%. So, the cinnamon was more active against cysts and the ginger was more active against the trophozoites in the rats (Mahmoud et al. 2014). The study also utilized electron microscopy to count and identify Giardia cysts and trophozoites. By utilizing this technology, and the researchers were able to show that not only was the infection reduced with cinnamon, but the intestinal mucosa was healthier in the samples taken as compared to the ginger-dosed rats (Mahmoud et al. 2014). This study, however did not utili ze a positive control group to measure the difference (if any) between using ginger and cinnamon extracts compared with using metronidazole or other drug treatment for giardiasis. Additional research may determine whether the intestinal mucosa would improve, with the drug treatment as occurred in the study with cinnamon and ginger (Mahmoud et al. 2014). Garlic and Shallot One of the most promising and researched herbal extract is allicin, a component of plants in the garlic and onion family. Garlic and shallot plants have been used in traditional medicine in various parts of the world for hundreds of years (Mikaili et al. 2013). Sulfur-based components like allicin (diallyl dithiosulfinate), diallyl disulfide, and S-allylcystein of these plants are of interest to research for use in pharmacological studies (Mikaili et al. 2013). In an in vitro study investigating whole garlic extract (Harris et al. 2000), garlic was shown to be effective against Giardia intestinalis at a concentration of 0.3mg/mL. The researchers went on to examine how the compounds in garlic were acting on the Giardia and whether allicin was the compound of interest. Allicin has a very short half-life in vivo, but the thiosulfates that result from its breakdown are bioavailable longer to act against Giardia trophozoites (Harris et al. 2000). In this study the researchers investigated the anti-parasitic activity of these compounds, and they showed that diallyl disulphide was particularly effective in reducing the number of trophozoites. Another component, allyl alcohol, damaged the trophozoites by causing cellular swelling and immobility (Harris et al. 2000). In another study focusing on diallyl trisulfide (DAT) from garlic, a concentration of 300 ug/mL was effective against Giardia lamblia (Lun et al. 1994). The researchers used an in vitro test to determine the IC50 for DAT, and the result was 8.5-14 ug/mL, using the same tests that determined the IC50 of metronidazole. The use of DAT in China for treatment of other parasitic infections is not uncommon (Lun et al. 1994), but it will be necessary to determine how DAT is effective against the parasite in vivo in future research. One avenue that research may pursue is in studying how DAT affects tubulin (Hosono et al. 2005), which would indicate that this substance has a similar effect as the benzimidazole drugs like albendazole. Further research into obtaining effective concentrations of these components of garlic and onions is necessary. Herbal Extracts Other herbal extracts have been investigated for their biologically active components and effectiveness as a treatment for giardiasis. Three of these show promise in recent studies. Peppermint (Mentha x piperta L.) is used as an herbal remedy for stomach discomfort (Vidal et al. 2007). Dill is also used in some areas of the world to treat children with diarrhea (Sahib et al. 2014). Pomegranate peel contains some substances that prove active against Giardia (Al-Megrin 2016). Mentha x piperta (peppermint) is known to have a relaxation effect on gastrointestinal smooth muscle, and this is suspected to be the result of the menthol affecting calcium channels (Kiefer et al. 2008). In one study methanolic extract from Mentha x piperta was tested against Giardia lamblia (Vidal et al. 2007). This study measures IC50, which is the calculation of the amount of a substance necessary to inhibit or kill one-half of the microbes. The IC50 after 48 hours of exposure was 0.8 ug/mL, similar to the IC50 of metronidazole and furazalidone after 24 hours (Vidal et al. 2007). The study tested different concentrations of the dichloromethane (DCM) from Mentha x piperta and found that a dose of 100 ug/mL after 48 hours almost eliminated the presence of trophozoites in the culture media (Vidal et al. 2007). The study also examined how DCM was altering the morphology of trophozoites utilizing electron microscopy, and found changes to plasma membranes (Vidal et al. 2007). This sugg ests the need for further research into why the protozoal membranes were altered, what biologically active components of peppermint were involved, and whether this alteration would also affect intestinal cells in mammals (measuring potential toxicity). In a study that researched the extracts from the Dill plant (Anethum graveolens), researchers conducted a clinical trial with children Giardia trophozoites and cysts, or if the dill acted on the muscle cells in the intestine, reducing smooth muscle contraction. Further research needs to be conducted into these issues. Pomegranate peel extract was also tested for anti-Giardia activity in another study (Al-Megrin 2016). Researchers studied mice that were infected with the Giardia cysts, and given an extract of pomegranate peel daily. Then the number of cysts produced in the mouse stool and the antigen presence for Giardia were counted and measured respectively. There was a reduction in the number of cysts counted in the groups of mice that had received the pomegranate, however there was also a natural reduction in the number of cysts in the studys control group (Al-Megrin 2016). The researchers also reported that the rate of detection of the Giardia antigen in the groups that were treated was significantly (P Native Plants Ethnopharmacology is becoming one method for identifying plant-based sources for new pharmacological treatments. Ethnopharmacology studies involve interviewing people who are native to specific areas to identify historical and current plant species used to treat disease. In the case of Giardia treatment, researchers identified diarrhea as the key symptom in 90% of human cases (Neiva et al. 2014). Although people reporting to clinics or hospitals with diarrhea did not necessarily identify causative agents, in some cases they were self-treating with plants from the area or from their own gardens (Neiva, et al. 2014). The identification of plants used by people suffering from diarrhea allowed researchers to focus on specific plant species in anti-giardiasis studies. In one study by Neiva et al. (2014) the researchers focused on an area around Sao Luis, Brazil. From interviewing and collecting plant samples that people were using to treat diarrhea and dysentery symptoms, the researchers identified five potential plants to test for anti-Giardia effectiveness. The researchers also identified the part of the plants and the preparation of the plants used for treatment of diarrhea by these patients of a healthcare facility and private specialty institution (Neiva et al. 2014). The five species of plants selected to investigate were Anacardium occidentale L., Chenopodium ambrosioides L., Passiflora edulis Sims., Psiddiumguajava L., and Stachytarpheta cayennesis (Rich) Vahl. (Neiva et al. 2014). It was found that all the plants had some giardicidal activity, but Passiflora was most effective at IC50 In another similar ethnopharmacology study, researchers investigated plants native to the Yucatan peninsula in Mexico that were used to treat diarrhea (Paraza-Sanchez et al. 2005). This study was conducted in vitro using 10 methanol extracts from native plants. In this study Tridax procumens as a whole plant was used (air-dried and powdered into methanol, then evaporated, and added to DMSO) (Paraza-Sanchez et al. 2005). The researchers identified from other studies that the plant contains hydrocarbons, fatty acids, flavonoids, bis-bithiophene. Flavonoids may contain polyphenols and inhibit Giardia from adhering to the intestinal wall (Anthony et al. 2007) In other plants tested, C. dentata, D. cahagenesis, and B. cressifolia have not had their chemical components analyzed, although they all had giardicidal activity (Paraza-Sanchez et al. 2005). It is unknown at this time why these native plants are effective against Giardia spp. (Paraza-Sanchez et al. 2005). Research has been conducted on the Rubus liebmanii medicinal plant native to Mexico. The antiprotozoal active compounds were identified as epicatechin and catechin (polyphenols), Nigaichigoside F1, beta-sitosterol, squalene, and 3,4 hydroxybenzoic acid (Jimà ©nez-Arellanes et al. 2012). In this study, extracts from the plant were fractionated to identify specific compounds, an extract of R. liebomanii was tested against G. lamblia with a negative control and a metronidazole infused positive control, and the research continued using guinea pigs and mice as test subjects. The results indicated that the Nigaichigoside F1 had an IC50 of 2.17 ug/mL as compared with metronidazole which had an IC50 of 0.5 ug/mL in cultures of G. lamblia (Jimà ©nez-Arellanes et al. 2012). When the potential toxicity of the plant was tested in male rats, the pure extract of R. liebmanii was not toxic, even at 1000mg/kg dosages (Jimà ©nez-Arellanes et al. 2012). Further research into these plants may involv e identifying how the active components are working against the protozoans and identify more effective treatments, which will need to be tested in vivo. Solanum lycoparum is also a native plant of Brazil. In research published in 2015 (Gilmarcio et al. 2015), this native species was investigated for its anti-Giardia potential. The fruit of this plant is used in traditional medicine (Gilmarcio et al. 2015). Two glycoalkaloids, solamargin (Sg) and solasonine (Sn) have been identified as having potential as anti-Giardia treatments (Gilmarcio et al. 2015). Both compounds were effective against Giardia lamblia, with Sg having an IC50 of 120.3 ug/mL and Sn having an IC50 of 103.7 ug/mL. However, when both compounds were mixed as they would be in the fruit of S. lycoparum, their IC50 was 13.23 ug/mL, much lower (Gilmarcio et al. 2015). This demonstrates a synergistic effect of the compounds. The researchers also used an index of selectivity calculation to measure effectiveness of the compound as compared to toxicity against macrophages, and the combined glycoalkaloids had a relatively high index (Gilmarcio et al. 2015). This index was neces sary because glycoalkaloids can be toxic. In vitro studies of the combined Sn+Sg treatment would provide additional research opportunities and determine the toxic effects of the glycoalkaloid while treating Giardia lamblia. Glycoalkaloids affect permeability of mammalian intestinal cells (Gee et al. 1996), however the glycoalkaloids found and studied from the S. lycoparum are not the most toxic. It is likely; however, no research could be found in the current literature searches, that the effect of glycoalkaloids on the Giardia trophozoites cell membrane did cause cellular swelling and changes to the vesicles and flagella. Essential Oils Clove oil, an essential oil from Syzgium aromaticum, has been used to treat digestive disorders and diarrhea (Machado et al. 2011). Research into essential oils has shown they are effective against many bacterial and fungal infections, but little research has been done to discover how the oil works (Machado et al. 2011). Eugenol is a major of several essential oils including S. aromaticum, and in this research the eugenol comprised 85% of the essential oil tested (Machado et al. 2011).In a study testing the effect of clove oil and eugenol on Giardia lamblia it was shown that S. aromaticum had an IC50 value of 134 ug/mL and eugenol had an IC50 value of 101 ug/mL (Machado et al. 2011). The study also utilized scanning and transmission electron microscopy to measure morphological changes in the Giardia that were incubated with the S. aromaticum essential oil. It was observed that the adherence of the Giardia was inhibited in the presence of eugenol (Machado et al. 2011). Giardia normall y attach to the intestinal wall to maintain position, obtain nutrients, and reproduce. The essential oil contained eugenol, and although it affected adherence, it did not cause the Giardia trophozoites to lyse, so the results in this study indicated that other components of the S. aromaticum oil were responsible for the cell death (Machado et al. 2011). Other essential oils are used to treat digestive issues. One, from Ocimum basilicum of the basil family, was studied for its anti-Giardia effects (de Almeida et al. 2007). In this study the researchers again isolated components of the essential oil and tested for antigiardial activity (de Almeida et al. 2007). This study also investigated eugenol as one of those components, and found the eugenol was effective against the Giardia trophozoites (de Almeida et al. 2007). The study included testing the linalool, which makes up 69.33% of the essential oil in addition to eugenol. Linalool was shown to be even more effective at reducing the number of viable Giardia lamblia trophozoites (de Almeida et al. 2007). To verify potential toxicity of the essential oil and its components, the researchers tested mouse macrophages in the same concentrations of Ocimum basilicum, eugenol and linalool and found that there was little to no effect on the cells (de Almeida et al. 2007). The researchers also identified an inhibitory effect of the oil and it components to a group of cysteine peptidases enzymes that are commonly found in these protozoans (de Almeida et al. 2007). The inhibition of cysteine peptidases has been shown to have a lethal effect on trophozoites of another protozoal species, Entamoeba histolytica (Ankri et al. 1997). Ozone In an interesting study (Boland-Nazar et al. 2016), olive oil injected with ozone was tested as a treatment for giardiasis. In an in vitro study, the tubes of Giardia were combined with different concentrations of ozonated olive oil, and this proved effective against Giardia cysts after 100 hours of incubation (Boland-Nazar et al. 2016). It is suspected by the researchers that the extra oxygen atom acts a free radical, like the immunological response of macrophages and neutrophils (Boland-Nazar et al. 2016). Olive oil is effective at stabilizing a delivery system for ozone without losing its durability (Boland-Nazar et al. 2016), and the higher the concentration of ozone in the oil, the more effective the treatment is against Giardia cysts. The researchers suggest conducting an in vivo study with this substance to verify their hypothesis (Boland-Nazar et al. 2016). Discussion Research into treating giardiasis will continue as standard treatments like metronidazole go up against greater drug resistance. The mode of action of different therapies has been investigated and includes inhibiting PFOR, cysteine proteinases, inhibiting adherence (Anthony et al. 2007), tubulin and cytoskeleton interference, and cell membrane interference. Table 1 shows some of the different treatments dosage requirements and active compounds. The 5nitroimadazole drugs are the most commonly prescribed treatments for giardiasis world-wide. New drugs are being developed from within this class, altering the nitro-group or adding benzene rings to the molecules to improve effectiveness considering growing metronidazole resistance (Watkins and Eckmann 2014). Other drugs that have been prescribed for anti-parasitic treatment or other purposes entirely are also being investigated. This includes anthelminthic drugs as well as drugs that were initially developed to treat obesity and rheumatoid arthritis (Watkins and Eckmann 2014). Finally, herbal, spice, and plant-based extracts are being investigated for their antiprotozoal activity. Although Table1 does not show an IC50 for each of the compounds discussed in this paper, it does highlight the active components. Table 1: Effectiveness of different substances in inhibiting Giardia IC50 Active compound Reference Metronidazole 0.8 ug/mL 5-nitroimadazole Jarrad et al. 2016, Watkins and Eckmann, 2014, Vidal et al 2007 Albendazole 52.4 ug/mL Benzimidazole Jarrad et al. 2016, Watkins and Eckmann, 2014, Lemee et al. 2000 Furazolidone 0.65 ug/mL 5-nitrofurans Jarrad et al. 2016, Watkins and Eckmann, 2014, Vidal et al 2007 Garlic 14 ug/mL Diallyl trisulfide Lun

The Decision That Affected My Life

Sometimes there are decisions that can affect your whole life. It means that if you take a wrong step, you will go the wrong way. There are many examples, when people did some something and then regretted it the entire life. Now I want to tell my case, when the decision I made affected my life. As many young people of my age I like music. I like going to clubs. I go there with my friends. I have many friends and they all are very different. Some of them use drugs to get high. I do not know much about this because I never tried drugs but I presume that some drugs they use are hard.That night we went together instead of meeting in the club as usual. We came to the apartment of one of my friend because his parents were out. Then this friend brought in syringes, needles, and the drugs. All my friends wanted to take drugs. Some of them would do it for the first time. They proposed me but I refused. They were trying to persuade me but I did not give in. They said I was stupid and one time would do nothing. But after I continued to refuse, they got angry with me and said I must go.And so I went. They were not my friends any more. I think I took the right decision. Moreover, I think it affected my life greatly. Just imagine what could have happened if I had not been firm enough to refuse. I would continue to use drugs and I would become a drug-addict. Perhaps I would not even enter my college. I know that some of my former â€Å"friends† ended badly. Perhaps I would end so too. Now I am happy that I was wise enough to take the right decision that affected my life in the right way.

Cognitive Ability

Journal of Applied Psychology 2010, Vol. 95, No. 5, 889 –901  © 2010 American Psychological Association 0021-9010/10/$12. 00 DOI: 10. 1037/a0019985 Get Smarty Pants: Cognitive Ability, Personality, and Victimization Eugene Kim and Theresa M. Glomb University of Minnesota Drawing on the victim precipitation model, this study provides an empirical investigation of the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization at work. We propose that people high in cognitive ability are more prone to victimization.In this study, we also examine the direct and moderating effects of victims’ personality traits, specifically the 2 interpersonally oriented personality dimensions of agency and communion. Results support the direct positive relationship of cognitive ability and victimization. The positive relationship between high cognitive ability and victimization is moderated by the victims’ personality traits; agency personality traits strengthen the relationship of cognitive ability and victimization, whereas communion personality traits weaken this relationship.Keywords: cognitive ability, victimization, personality, agency, communion Recently, a Seattle Times article described the victimization of Suzuki Ichiro, a high-ability baseball player who achieved 200 hits for 8 consecutive years and was the 2007 All Star Game Most Valuable Player (see Baker, 2008). The article reported that his teammates from the Seattle Mariners stated they â€Å"really dislike him† and wanted to â€Å"knock him out† because this high-ability player cares more about individual records than team records.A popular press article (Bruzzese, 2002) reported that victims of workplace bullying are often employees who are â€Å"smart† and â€Å"talented,† and organizations that fail to prevent victimization against these talented employees will experience their turnover, decreases in productivity, and increases in health care costs (see also Murp hy, 2006). Similarly, a survey of workplace victimization suggests that â€Å"bright† people are often targets of interpersonal aggression because of their high level of ability (Namie & Namie, 2000).In the school context, research by Peterson and Ray (2006a, 2006b) on gifted children suggests that many high-ability students experience bullying in school because of their intellectual capability. Although each of the above examples provides a mere glimpse into the phenomena of victimization, together they suggest that ability may be a critical precipitating factor in victimization. However, there is limited research attention to the possibility that ability, specifically cognitive ability, may be associated with being a target of victimization—the possibility of â€Å"smart victims. Given that Brand (1987) posited â€Å"cognitive ability is to psychol- This article was published Online First August 16, 2010. Eugene Kim and Theresa M. Glomb, Department of Human Resourc es and Industrial Relations, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota. An earlier version of this article was presented at the 2009 Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana.We are grateful to Michelle Duffy, Paul Sackett, and the participants of the Center for Human Resources and Labor Studies Workshop for comments on earlier versions of this article. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Eugene Kim, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, 321 19th Avenue South, Room 3-300, Minneapolis, MN 55455. E-mail: [email  protected] umn. edu 889 ogy as carbon is to chemistry† (p. 257), it is surprising that cognitive ability has not received attention in the workplace victimization literature.This study takes an important first step in establishing the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization in an organizational context; it builds the scholarly knowledge base of workplac e victimization and suggests that smart victims may be important to consider in attempts to prevent workplace victimization. In doing so, it makes contributions to the literature on cognitive ability, victimization, and an emerging theme in management research suggesting that victims may precipitate aggression from others in the workplace (for review, see Aquino & Thau, 2009).We outline these contributions below. First, this study suggests an exception to the generally accepted idea that cognitive ability is associated with various positive outcomes. Previous research confirming that cognitive ability predicts many job and real-life outcomes is plentiful (see Brand, 1987; Jensen, 1998; Kuncel, Hezlett, & Ones, 2004; Schmidt & Hunter, 1998); however, typically these outcomes are favorable. In comparison, we propose victimization, a negative outcome, will be higher for those high in cognitive ability.Understanding the relationship between cognitive ability and workplace victimization is particularly relevant because cognitive ability is used in selection decisions (Heneman & Judge, 2005) and is strongly related to skill and knowledge acquisition, task performance, and creativity at work (Kuncel et al. , 2004). Thus, understanding workplace victimization for those high in cognitive ability can reduce the risk of negative outcomes for these highly desirable employees, including decreased motivation, job satisfaction, and task performance (Glomb, 2002, in press) as well as lower team and organizational performance (Aquino & Thau, 2009).Second, this study extends the scope of the victim precipitation model, the idea that victims either intentionally or unintentionally provoke potential perpetrators. The limited application of the victim precipitation model emphasizes submissive and provocative victim characteristics (Aquino, 2000; Olweus, 1993) but has not posed the possibility of smart victims (for exceptions, see Namie & Namie, 2000; Peterson & Ray, 2006a, 2006b). By positing and testing the idea that smart victims may also adhere to the victim 890 KIM AND GLOMB recipitation model, we extend this theoretical framework beyond the typical submissive and provocative victim typologies. Third, we extend previous research by considering two basic personality dimensions—agency and communion (Digman, 1997; Wiggins, 1991)—and their interplay with cognitive ability and victimization. According to Bakan (1966), agency is defined as individualization in a group, and it involves independence, dominance, and personal growth; communion is defined as integration of the individual in a group, and it involves cooperation, attachment, and caring (see alsoWiggins, 1991). The original aim of agency and communion personality traits was to understand and distinguish interpersonal behaviors between individuals (Wiggins, 1991), thereby making agency and communion especially relevant to workplace victimization in which the interpersonal relationship of perpetrators and victims is critical for understanding victimization motives (see Schafer, 1977).Drawing primarily on the theory of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960), we propose that communion is negatively related to victimization and also buffers the relationship of cognitive ability and victimization, whereas agency is positively related to victimization and also strengthens the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization. In summary, in this study we advance theoretical and empirical research on workplace victimization by examining the role of cognitive ability in precipitating victimization at work and how personality traits linked to more favorable interpersonal interactions (i. e. agency and communion) may have direct and moderating effects on victimization. Workplace Victimization The prevalence of harmful behaviors among employees has been reflected in a growing body of academic research (e. g. , Aquino & Thau, 2009; Barling, Dupre, & Kelloway, 2009; Bowl? ing & Bee hr, 2006; Douglas et al. , 2008; Glomb, Steel, & Arvey, 2002; Hershcovis et al. , 2007; Neuman & Baron, 2005; Sackett & DeVore, 2001). Researchers have examined interpersonal workplace aggression—any form of interpersonal behavior to harm, injure, or discomfort the target at work (Baron & Richardson, 1994; Glomb, 2002)—at the individual level (e. . , Baron & Neuman, 1996) and have also extended theoretical and empirical frameworks to consider group-level (e. g. , Glomb & Liao, 2003) and dyadic (e. g. , Andersson & Pearson, 1999) relationships. Drawing on theories of victimization (e. g. , Curtis, 1974; Schafer, 1968; Sparks, Genn, & Dodd, 1977), researchers have also examined workplace victimization—the self-perception of being a target of interpersonal aggression at work (Aquino, Grover, Bradfield, & Allen, 1999; Aquino & Thau, 2009)—at the individual level (e. g. , Aquino et al. 1999; Glomb, 2002), group level (e. g. , Aquino & Byron, 2002), and dyadic level (e. g. , Aquino & Lamertz, 2004). Drawing on criminology theory in which victim precipitation (Curtis, 1974) and victim elements (Schafer, 1968) are studied, researchers have suggested typical characteristics of victims. For example, Olweus’s (1978, 1993) work in school settings resulted in the proposition of two types of victims. One type of victim is labeled submissive victim and is more anxious, cautious, quiet, and sensitive than other students.In contrast to submissive victims, some students who show highly aggressive behaviors can also become the targets of aggression; Olweus (1993) referred to them as provocative victims. Although Olweus’s research was in a school setting, similar themes of victim types have been suggested in organizational contexts. For example, Aquino and colleagues (Aquino & Bradfield, 2000; Aquino & Byron, 2002; Aquino et al. , 1999) posited that self-determination, aggressiveness, dominating interpersonal behavior, and negative affect ivity are typical characteristics of victims.Individuals low in self-determination are more likely to be targets of aggression (e. g. , Aquino et al. , 1999) and may be likened to submissive victims. Individuals high in aggressiveness (e. g. , Aquino & Bradfield, 2000) and dominating interpersonal behavior (e. g. , Aquino & Byron, 2002) may be likened to provocative victims. Individuals high in negative affectivity may be likened to either submissive or provocative victims because negative affectivity is related to either insecurity and anxiety or hostility and aggression (e. . , Aquino & Bradfield, 2000; Aquino et al. , 1999). In other words, previous research suggests that certain types of individuals, either submissive or aggressive people, may be more frequent targets of aggression in both school and organizational contexts. Although existing research has enhanced the understanding of victimization, there is limited attention to the role of an important individual differenceâ₠¬â€ cognitive ability (for possible exceptions, see Namie & Namie, 2000; Peterson & Ray, 2006a, 2006b).Peterson and Ray (2006b) showed that many smart students experienced bullying in school contexts and that intellectual capability is one of the most frequently reported reasons for being bullied. In their study, 36% of smart students were called derogatory names (e. g. , dork, geek, nerd, smarty, idiot, moron, retard, dumb), and 19% of them were teased about their grades and intelligence. According to Peterson and Ray’s (2006a) qualitative study, some high-ability students reported that the envy of lowability students contributes to targeting smart students.Interviewees stated that â€Å"gifted kids have the upper hand in classrooms† and â€Å"good kids usually get what they want† (p. 257). In addition, some students responded that competition between gifted students contributes to targeting one another. One interviewee reported being the target of bullying fr om â€Å"other gifted kids who didn’t like that I was smarter than they were† (p. 258). One exception to the lack of research on ability and victimization in organizational contexts is a survey of working adults by Namie and Namie (2000).Although this study was not focused on the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization, their survey data provide insight into this issue. In their survey, more than 20% of survey participants (i. e. , targets and witnesses) responded that bright people were targets of interpersonal aggression, reporting that perpetrators envied the targets’ high level of competence and abilities (21%) and that perpetrators treated them as competitors or challengers who threatened their superiority (31%).Literature on school bullying among gifted children, employee reports of smart victims, and the submissive/provocative victim typology suggest that understanding the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization in an org anizational context is valuable. Linking Cognitive Ability and Victimization The victim precipitation model (e. g. , Amir, 1967; Curtis, 1974; Gottfredson, 1981; Schafer, 1968, 1977; Sparks et al. , 1977) undergirds the proposed relationship between cognitive ability and victimization. The core argument of the model is that victimsCOGNITIVE ABILITY AND VICTIMIZATION 891 exhibit behavioral tendencies (either intentional or unintentional) that provoke potential perpetrators to respond to them with harmful behaviors (see Aquino et al. , 1999; Schafer, 1977). In other words, at a minimum, victims unknowingly are at risk of victimization for their individual characteristics; at a maximum, individual characteristics lead to behaviors that elicit victimization from potential perpetrators. Cognitive ability may function as a â€Å"victim precipitator† for several reasons.First, the desirable characteristics of high-cognitive employees may unintentionally instigate other employees to react to them with harmful behaviors. As noted above, cognitive ability plays a central role in the prediction of myriad important workplace outcomes, including task performance, training performance, counterproductive work behavior, creativity, and career success (e. g. , Dilchert, Ones, Davis, & Rostow, 2007; Jensen, 1998; Judge, Higgins, Thoreson, & Barrick, 1999; Kuncel et al. , 2004; Ng, Eby, Sorensen, & Feldman, 2005; O’Reilly & Chatman, 1994; Schmidt & Hunter, 1998).For example, the validity of cognitive ability in predicting task performance, training performance, and creativity is . 51, . 57 (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998), and . 36 (Kuncel et al. , 2004), respectively. However, these favorable outcomes may also create conditions for victimization. Such positive outcomes of highcognitive-ability employees make them more likely to be targets of an upward or a lateral social comparison process within a work group because individuals choose a â€Å"standard setter† who has high ability as a comparative target (Feldman & Ruble, 1981; Festinger, 1954).As a consequence, these comparisons may elicit negative cognitive and affective states, such as lowered self-evaluation and emotions of envy, shame, hostility, and interpersonal competition (e. g. , Garcia, Tor, Gonzalez, 2006; Smith, 2000; Tesser, Millar, & Moore, 1988), which in turn increase the likelihood of becoming the target of victimization.In other words, the positive characteristics of high-cognitive-ability employees unintentionally place them at risk of being a target because others want to restore their lowered self-evaluation and negative emotions following comparison (see Fein & Spencer, 1997; Smith, 1991). Schafer (1977) categorized this type of victim as someone who has done nothing against the perpetrators but whose unintentional behaviors or outcomes instigate the perpetrators to commit aggressive behaviors toward the victim.Second, the favorable characteristics of high-cognitive-abi lity employees may instigate other employees within a work group to react to them with harming behaviors in a more intentional way. An experimental study by Menon and Thompson (2007) found that individuals in higher (relative) social comparison positions are more likely to overestimate that they are a threat to others. This perceptual bias leads them to experience uncomfortable interpersonal relationships as â€Å"asymmetries in threat appraisal [strain] social interactions during a conflict situation† (p. 6). In their study, people who regarded themselves as threatening elicited less favorable reactions from a counterpart and lower satisfaction with the interaction, even though these perceptions about threat were not communicated explicitly during the interaction. In an organizational context, because of the positive work outcomes of highcognitive-ability employees, they are more likely to have favorable views of themselves, to perceive that others are threatened by them, an d to distrust others’ motives (i. e. , self-enhancing bias; Menon & Thompson, 2007).In other words, high-cognitive employees may overestimate the comparison threat they pose to other group members, which may result in a change in behaviors—for example, avoidance or condescension—toward other group members. This change in behavior then elicits harming behaviors from others (see Duffy, Shaw, & Schaubroeck, 2008). In summary, drawing on the victim precipitation model, we argue that high-cognitive-ability employees may instigate other individuals to respond to them with interpersonally aggressive behaviors.First, high-cognitive-ability employees may unintentionally provoke potential perpetrators because of their position as upward or lateral social comparison targets, thereby fostering negative affective and cognitive states in others who turn to harming behaviors. Second, high-cognitive-ability employees may provoke potential perpetrators because of their overestim ates of how threatening they are, which results in changed behaviors against coworkers that promote more negative interactions.Accordingly, we hypothesized the following: Hypothesis 1: High cognitive ability is positively related to victimization. We note that the current study is unable to address the specific mechanism for the association between cognitive ability and victimization. Rather, we propose likely theoretical mechanisms and conduct empirical tests that would lend support for this association without testing the exact meditational processes. The Role of Personality Traits: Agency and CommunionAccording to Bakan (1966), there are â€Å"two fundamental modalities in the existence of living forms, agency for the existence of an organism as an individual and communion for the participation of the individual in some larger organism of which the individual is part [emphasis added]† (p. 14). Wiggins (1991) integrated Bakan’s idea into the personality literature, d efining agency and communion as â€Å"the condition of being a differentiated individual and the condition of being part of a larger social or spiritual entity [emphasis added]† (p. 9), and proposed that the agency– communion model is relevant to understand and distinguish interpersonal behaviors between individuals. Personality researchers have used agency and communion as umbrella terms that broadly cover self-oriented terms (including independence, egoistic bias, ambition, self-competence, personal growth, and instrumentality) versus group-oriented terms (including cooperation, attachment, consideration, warmth, nurturance, and socialization), although these constructs are not exactly the same (e. g. Abele & Wojciszke, 2007; Digman, 1997; Wiggins, 1991). Previous research suggested that two broad dimensions—akin to agency and communion—are independent higher order dimensions of personality in the interpersonal circumplex (e. g. , Blackburn, Renwick, Do nnelly, & Logan, 2004; Digman, 1997; Wiggins, 1991). With regard to the five-factor model of personality, Trapnell and Wiggins (1990) found that agency corresponds primarily to the dominance aspect of extraversion and that communion corresponds primarily to agreeableness (see also Peabody & Goldberg, 1989; Wiggins, 1991).Digman (1997) has also derived two independent higher order factors that correspond to an agency and communion taxonomy; agency corresponds to extraversion and openness (i. e. , personal growth), and communion corresponds to agreeableness, con- 892 KIM AND GLOMB scientiousness, and emotional stability (i. e. , socialization; see also John, 1990; McCrae & Costa, 1996). Recently, Abele and Wojciszke (2007) confirmed previous studies by showing that a pool of 300 trait items (e. g. , communion, collectivism, morality, and femininity items for communion; agency, individualism, competence, and masculinity items for agency) is educed to the two broad dimensions of agency and communion. This idea is well summarized by Abele and Wojciszke, who stated the following: There is a long tradition in social and personality psychology to distinguish fundamental dimensions for the description of persons and groups: social and intellectual desirability, individualism and collectivism, independent and interdependent self, competence and morality, competence and warmth, dominance and nurturance, masculinity and femininity, and so on.Following Bakan (1966), we call these fundamental dimensions agency and communion. (p. 759) a similar vein, Aquino and Bommer (2003) showed that high levels of organizational citizenship behavior decreases victimization; presumably, this relationship may be due to a positive reciprocity norm. Overall, targets who have high agency personality traits do not engage in the positive reciprocity cycle and are more likely to be engaged in the negative reciprocity circle, which increases the likelihood of victimization.Targets who have high c ommunion personality traits are more likely to be engaged in the positive reciprocity circle with coworkers, which decreases the likelihood of victimization. Therefore, we hypothesized the following: Hypothesis 2: High agency is positively related to victimization. Hypothesis 3: High communion is negatively related to victimization. Integrating the victim precipitation model with theories of reciprocity, we propose the moderating roles of agency and communion personality traits on the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization.Although high levels of cognitive ability and competence may make someone predisposed to victimization, this may depend on their interpersonal interactions with others as influenced by their agency and communion personality traits. Because agency-driven behaviors do not build a norm of positive reciprocity or possibly initiate a norm of negative reciprocity, it strengthens the positive relationship between targets’ cognitive ability and vi ctimization. For example, employees who are high in cognitive ability and agency traits may use their talent to increase individual performance, which may negatively impact other group members.Conversely, because communion-driven behaviors initiate a norm of positive reciprocity between the giver and the taker, it circumvents or buffers the positive relationship between targets’ cognitive ability and victimization. For example, employees who are high in both cognitive ability and communion traits may use their talent to increase group performance (e. g. , help coworkers with workloads or problems). Such behaviors contribute to build the positive reciprocity cycle with coworkers and thereby weaken the likelihood of victimization because of high cognitive ability.Put simply, being smart and focused on oneself will lead to more victimization, but being smart and focused on group members will lead to less victimization. Although there is no direct empirical evidence suggesting an interactive effect of cognitive ability and agency and communion traits on victimization, recent studies hint at the plausibility of such an effect. For example, Fiske, Cuddy, and Glick (2006) suggested that people differentiate one another by competence as well as likeability, which in turn affects their cognitive and affective content of interpersonal perception (see also Collins, 1981).Similarly, Casciaro and Lobo (2005) suggested the importance of competence and likeability in a work setting; when individuals were high in both competence and likeability, coworkers treated them as â€Å"lovable stars,† but when individuals were high in competence and low in likeability, coworkers treated them as â€Å"competent jerks. † Consistent with the previous conceptual arguments, Casciaro and Lobo (2008) showed that individuals who are competent and likeable form more task interaction networks, whereas individuals who are competent and dislikeable fail to form taskPut simply , agency and communion personality traits are independent multidimensional constructs (Saragovi, Koestner, Dio, & Aube, 1997) that reflect self-oriented and group-oriented behaviors. Given that behaviors are rooted in personality traits (see Fleeson, 2001; Hogan & Holland, 2003; Moskowitz & Cote, 1995) and that agency and communion personality traits serve to describe interpersonal behaviors (Wiggins, 1991), we propose that individuals who have more agency traits, such as independence, egoistic bias, ambition, and self-competence, are involved in agency-driven behaviors, such as seeking goals and being less concerned about others.Conversely, individuals who have more communion traits, such as communality, socialization, consideration, and warmth, are involved in communion-driven behaviors, such as helping and nurturing coworkers and developing harmonious interpersonal relationships with coworkers. The direct relationship between agency and communion personality traits and victimizat ion is supported by theories of reciprocity. Agency-driven behaviors do not build a norm of positive reciprocity, at best (Axelrod, 1984), and initiate a norm of negative reciprocity, at worst (Andersson & Pearson, 1999).In the absence of a norm of positive reciprocity, employees do not feel obligated to respond to (positive) actions with other positive actions. Individuals high in agency engage in agency-driven behaviors, which may be at the expense of and harmful to others. A norm of negative reciprocity will perpetuate these harmful behaviors. Thus, aggressive behaviors against individuals who are high in agency may, in fact, increase. This implies higher victimization for people who have agency traits that either block the positive reciprocity norm or elicit the negative reciprocity norm through agency-driven behaviors.Conversely, communion-driven behaviors initiate a norm of positive reciprocity between the giver and the taker (Gouldner, 1960). In other words, the taker general ly responds to the communion-driven behavior with another communion-driven behavior toward the giver. After building a norm of positive reciprocity, both givers and takers are reluctant to violate this relationship through harming one another because it breaks the social norm and promotes a reputation for being untrustworthy, unkind, and unthankful (Cialdini, 2001; Gouldner, 1960).Thus, individuals who are high in communion traits engage in communion-driven behaviors and perpetuate a norm of positive reciprocity in which they are less likely to be the targets of interpersonal aggression. In COGNITIVE ABILITY AND VICTIMIZATION 893 interaction networks. Although failure to form task networks with â€Å"competent jerks† is distinct from victimizing them, this work does suggest withholding something favorable from them—a behavior that is consistent with some passive, indirect forms of victimization examined here (e. . , withholding information or resources). In line with t his research, we predict that two interpersonally oriented personality dimensions that affect likeability play a critical role in the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization; smart individuals who are high in agency traits may experience more victimization, whereas smart individuals who are high in communion traits may experience less victimization.Therefore, we hypothesized the following: Hypothesis 4: The relationship between cognitive ability and victimization is moderated by agency, such that when targets are high in cognitive ability, targets high in agency will experience more victimization than those lower on agency. Hypothesis 5: The relationship between cognitive ability and victimization is moderated by communion, such that when targets are high in cognitive ability, targets high in communion will experience less victimization than those lower on communion.Method Participants and Procedure Two hundred and seventeen employees of an organization that manages health care homes for individuals with disabilities voluntarily completed paper-and-pencil surveys during on-site survey administration with researchers. 1 Participants were guaranteed confidentiality. Employees within a health care home worked closely with one another to provide excellent care and service for the residents, and they constitute our work groups.Of the respondents, 95% were Caucasian, 74% were women, and 35% were employed full time. Average tenure was 22 months, and average age was 24 years. The organization had administered the Wonderlic Personnel Test (Wonderlic, 1984) and the California Psychological Inventory (CPI; Gough & Bradley, 1996) to job applicants prior to hire, and the Wonderlic and CPI scores of our respondents were linked to the survey data from the current study using identifiers. Fifty employees who did not have Wonderlic and CPI scores were excluded.After listwise deletion of individuals with incomplete information, the final sample was composed of 133 employees in 27 groups (i. e. , health care homes). Group size ranged from two to 10 members (average 4. 93). Comparisons between those respondents who were in our final sample and those who were deleted because of missing data revealed only one significant difference; excluded employees had slightly lower negative affectivity scores ( p . 05). Measures Cognitive ability. Cognitive ability was assessed using the Wonderlic Personnel Test prior to hire.The Wonderlic Personnel Test is a 50-item, 12–20-min omnibus test of intelligence, and it was originally designed to measure general mental ability for personnel selection. The manual reports that test–retest reliability ranges from . 82 to . 94 and that interform reliabilities range from . 73 to . 95 (Wonderlic, 1984). Victimization. Victimization was assessed using the 20-item Aggressive Experiences Scale (AES)-Target scale (Glomb, in press; Glomb & Liao, 2003). Illustrative items are â€Å"how often has a coworker or supervisor made angry gestures toward you? â€Å"how often has a coworker or supervisor spread rumors about you? † and â€Å"how often has a coworker or supervisor belittled your opinions in front of others? † Respondents indicated the frequency of their victimization experience using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (once a week or more). One item was removed because of zero variance (â€Å"how often has a coworker or supervisor physically assaulted you? †). The coefficient alpha of the AESTarget scale was . 87. Agency and communion.At present, there are not commonly accepted assessments of agency and communion, perhaps because of their designation as higher order constructs. Agency and communion have been measured by the Masculinity and Femininity scales from several personality inventories, including the Personal Attributes Questionnaire (Spence, Helmreich, & Stapp, 1974) and the Bem Sex Role Inventory (Bem, 1974; for review, see Helgeson, 1994; Saragovi et al. , 1997). Agency and communion have also been measured using the five-factor model; Wiggins (1991) suggested using the Extraversion (i. e. dominance facet only) and Agreeableness scales because these capture a substantial portion of variance in agency and communion, respectively (for empirical support, see also Peabody & Goldberg, 1989; Trapnell & Wiggins, 1990). Also, using the Big Five framework, Digman (1997) suggested using the Extraversion and Openness scales for agency (i. e. , personal growth) and the Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability scales for communion (i. e. , socialization). In this study, agency and communion were operationalized using both Wiggins’s (1991) specific measure approach and Digman’s (1997) broad measure approach.Following Wiggins’s approach, we selected the CPI scale of Dominance ( . 83) for agency and the CPI scale of Communality ( . 71) for communion. The CPI-Dominance is highly correlated with extraversion (r . 82; Fleenor & Eastman, 1997), and dominance is a key facet of extraversion (DeYoung, Quilty, & Peterson, 2007). The construct definition also supported our choice: Individuals high in dominance are assertive, dominant, and task-oriented; individuals low in dominance are quiet and cautious. The CPI-Communality is highly correlated with agreeableness (r . 0; Fleenor & Eastman, 1997), and agreeableness corresponds to communion (Wiggins, 1991). The construct definition of communality supports our decision: Individuals who are high in communality are likely to be team players who fit in with other people easily, agreeable, cooperative, reasonable, approachable for advice, dependable, and contented; individuals who are low in communality are likely to be nonconformers, changeable, moody, and reckless (Gough & Bradley, 1996; Groth-Marnat, 1990). Following Digman’s (1997) broader approach to agency measurement, we selected the CPI scales of Social Presence ( . 2), 1 This data set was used to examine different research questions in Glomb and Liao (2003), Glomb and Tews (2004), and Glomb and Welsh (2005). 894 KIM AND GLOMB Capacity for Status ( . 72), and Independence ( . 74) in addition to Dominance. These additional three scales have been identified as compound traits of extraversion and openness (Fleenor & Eastman, 1997), and extraversion and openness correspond to agency (Digman, 1997). CPI-Social Presence also corresponds to the dominance facet rather than the sociability facet of extraversion (Hough & Ones, 2001).The construct definition supported our choice: Individuals high in social presence are self-assured in social settings, and individuals low in social presence are reserved; individuals high in capacity for status are likely to be ambitious and to have high desire to succeed, and individuals low in capacity for status dislike competition; individuals high in independence are likely to be self-sufficient, persistent in seeking goals whether others agree, aggressive, and assertive, and individuals low in independence are likely to seek support from others, avoid conflict, be meek, and be mild (Gough & Bradley, 1996).We used similar conceptual and construct evidence for the Communion scale. In addition to CPI-Communality, we selected the CPI scales of Socialization ( . 78) and Responsibility ( . 77) because these two scales have been identified by Hough and Ones (2001) as compound traits of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability (see also Fleenor & Eastman, 1997); furthermore, Digman (1997) has suggested that communion corresponds to agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability.The construct definition of these two components also supported our decision: Individuals high in socialization are likely to be conscientious and easy to conform to others, whereas individuals low in socialization are likely to be rebellious and to have unconventional attitudes; individuals high in respons ibility are responsible and ethically perceptive, whereas individuals low in responsibility are likely to be self-indulgent and careless (Gough & Bradley, 1996).In summary, the Agency scale is composed of the CPI scales of Dominance, Social Presence, Capacity for Status, and Independence; the Communion scale is composed of the CPI scales of Communality, Socialization, and Responsibility. 2 Given the typical conceptualization of agency and communion as broad traits, we consider the broad operationalization in our primary analyses and conduct additional analyses for the narrow, one variable conceptualization. The reliability scores of multidimensional Agency and Communion scales were . 87 and . 84, respectively (see Cronbach, 1951; W. M. Rogers, Schmitt, & Mullins, 2002).We conducted confirmatory factor analysis to assess whether the CPI scales load on the higher order common latent constructs of agency and communion using LISREL 8 (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1996). The results for the ? Agen cy and Communion scales reveal that a two-factor model— 2 (12) 19. 43; incremental fit index (IFI) . 98; comparative fit index (CFI) . 98; standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) . 06; root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) . 07—fits the data quite well and fits significantly better than a one-factor model— 2(13) 49. 96; IFI . 91; CFI . 90; SRMR . 10; RMSEA . 5—providing evidence that subscales load on the higher order measures of agency and communion. In addition, agency and communion correlate . 16 (ns) in our study, which is comparable with correlations reported in previous studies (e. g. , Abele & Wojciszke, 2007 [r –. 03, –. 05]; Bruch, 2002 [r . 05, . 11]; Conway, Pizzamiglio, & Mount, 1996 [r . 27, . 32]). We also assessed the criterion-related validity of the Agency and Communion scales by examining whether they are significantly related to variables shown to be related to agency and communion measures in the broader p ersonality psychology literature.Specifically, we assessed life satisfaction and burnout in our study but did not examine these variables in our substantive hypotheses. Correlations in our data are similar to those in prior literature using alternative operationalizations of communion and agency. Specifically, results show that our Communion scale is significantly related to well-being outcomes, such as life satisfaction (r . 24, p . 01, compared with r . 26 for women and . 28 for men in Saragovi et al. , 1997), and that our Agency scale is significantly related to psychological health outcomes, such as emotional exhaustion (r –. 21, p . 01, compared with r –. 5 in Roos & Cohen, 1987). Control variables. On the basis of previous workplace victimization research (e. g. , Aquino et al. , 1999; Aquino & Thau, 2009; Bowling & Beehr, 2006; Hentig, 1948; Schafer, 1968), we controlled for several variables to reduce the potential impact of unmeasured variables on victimizatio n. Empirical evidence on the relationship between employee demographics and victimization shows mixed findings (Bowling & Beehr, 2006); we control for an employee’s age, gender, and tenure in the organization. There is a compelling theoretical link between organizational hierarchy and victimization (see Aquino et al. 1999); we control for supervisory versus nonsupervisory status. Individual differences, such as positive and negative affectivity, show mixed relationships with victimization (see Bowling & Beehr, 2006); we use the Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) to control for positive affectivity ( . 86) and negative affectivity ( . 86). Stress may generate negative affective and behavioral responses that spark victimization (Bowling & Beehr, 2006); we use the Stress Diagnostic Survey (Matteson & Ivancevich, 1982) to control for job, work group, and organizational stress ( . 9 for job, . 89 for work group, and . 87 for organizational s tress). Interpersonal aggression engagement has been proposed as an antecedent of victimization on the basis of social exchange theory (Andersson & Pearson, 1999; Bandura, 1973), and Glomb and her colleagues (e. g. , Glomb, 2002; Glomb & Liao, 2003) provided empirical support for the idea of reciprocal aggression. Interpersonal aggression engagement was assessed by the AES-Engaged In scale (Glomb, in press; Glomb & Liao, 2003).The AES-Target (discussed above) and AES-Engaged In scales have the same item content except that one asks about behaviors that you were the target of and the others asks about behavior that you engaged in. We removed three items from the AES-Engaged In scale ( . 80) because of zero variance. Other CPI scales were excluded for one of two reasons: (a) They did not include the core dimensions of Extroversion–Dominance for agency or Agreeableness for communion, or (b) they included these dimensions but were contaminated by others as well.These â€Å"mixed † scales were the most likely reason for exclusion. Specific mappings of CPI scales to Big Five (i. e. , A: agreeableness, C: conscientiousness, ES: emotional stability, EX: extraversion, O: openness) characteristics are as follows: Self-Acceptance (ES EX), Empathy (EX O C), Well-Being (ES EX), Tolerance (O A), Achievement With Conformation (O C), Achievement With Independence (ES EX O C), Psychological-Mindedness (ES O), Flexibility (O C), Sociability (EX-Sociability), Intellectual Efficiency (O), Self-Control (ES C), and Good Impression (C). COGNITIVE ABILITY AND VICTIMIZATION 895 Results Descriptive statistics and zero-order correlations are presented in Table 1. Cognitive ability is significantly correlated with victimization (r . 18, p . 05). Agency and communion are not significantly correlated with victimization. Several control variables—including age (r . 21, p . 01); job, workgroup, organizational stress (r . 41, . 24, . 41, respectively, p . 01); and aggressi on engagement (r . 54, p . 01)—are significantly correlated with victimization.The control variables of positive and negative affectivity and hierarchical status suggest nonsignificant associations with victimization. Table 2 presents the regression results using the broad operationalization of agency and communion (see Digman, 1997). Because individuals in the same work group are not independent, the independent assumption of traditional ordinary least squares regression is violated, causing biased estimators. Therefore, we used a clustered regression with a White-correction in STATA that allows covariance between individuals within groups and corrects for heteroscedasticity across groups (see W.H. Rogers, 1993). We report unstandardized regression coefficients and regular R2 because standardized coefficients and adjusted R2 are not valid with the cluster option (see Glomb & Liao, 2003; W. H. Rogers, 1993). We tested the degree of multicollinearity with the variance inflatio n factor; values ranged from 1. 05 to 1. 94, with an average variance inflation factor of 1. 37, suggesting it was not a critical problem. Control variables explain 42% of the variance in victimization (Model 1). Model 2 includes cognitive ability, agency, and communion.Results suggest a significant relationship between cognitive ability and victimization (b 0. 17, p . 01), supporting Hypothesis 1. Agency and victimization were also significantly associated (b 0. 08, p . 05), supporting Hypothesis 2. This association is different from the nonsignificant zero-order correlation, suggesting the association exists after controlling for other variables. Consistent with the zero-order correlations, communion was not significantly associated with victimization; Hypothesis 3 was not supported. These variables explain an additional 4% of the variance in victimization.Table 1 Descriptive Statistics and Correlations Variable 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Gender Tenure (years) Age (years) Hierarchical status Negative affectivity Positive affectivity Job stress Workgroup stress Organizational stress Aggression engagement Agency (index) Communion (index) Agency (CPI–Dominance) Communion (CPI–Communality) Cognitive ability Victimization M SD 1 . 15 . 09 . 05 . 00 . 11 . 02 . 12 . 21 . 11 . 01 . 09 . 03 . 09 . 18 . 02 2 3 4 To test the moderating effects of personality traits, we used hierarchical moderated regression with centered interaction terms.Interaction terms explain an additional 4% of the variance in victimization (Model 3). Hypothesis 4, which predicts the moderating role of agency personality traits on the association between cognitive ability and victimization, was supported (b 0. 02, p . 05). Hypothesis 5, which predicts the moderating role of communal personality traits on the association between cognitive ability and victimization, was also supported (b – 0. 05, p . 05). The interactions were plotted using Aiken an d West’s (1991) method and are shown in Figures 1 and 2.Figure 1 illustrates that as cognitive ability increases, for those high in agency, victimization increases compared with those low in agency. Figure 2 illustrates that as cognitive ability increases, for those low in communion, victimization increases, and for those high in communion, victimization decreases. These results suggest that agency traits exacerbate and that communion traits buffer the relationship of cognitive ability to victimization. We tested the same regression model using specific measures of agency and communion, which is consistent with Wiggins’s (1991) operationalization (i. e. CPI-Dominance for agency and CPI-Communality for communion). These results suggest similar empirical findings, which confirm the role of cognitive ability, agency, and communion on victimization at work. Table 3 presents the regression results. In Model 4, results suggest a significant relationship between cognitive abi lity and victimization (b 0. 15, p . 05), supporting Hypothesis 1. Dominance and victimization were significantly associated (b 0. 11, p . 05), supporting Hypothesis 2. Communality was also significantly associated with victimization (b – 0. 18, p . 05), supporting Hypothesis 3.This finding is different than the broad communion index, in which the association was not significant. These variables explain an additional 6% of the variance in victimization. In Model 5, interaction terms explain an additional 2% of the variance in victimization. Hypothesis 4, which predicts the moderating role of agency personality traits on the association between cognitive ability and victimization, 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 0. 74 0. 44 1. 85 2. 21 23. 77 7. 41 0. 73 0. 45 19. 24 5. 22 37. 61 5. 63 11. 94 3. 81 9. 63 3. 63 14. 94 5. 02 21. 33 5. 06 55. 55 7. 98 55. 21 4. 25 58. 85 10. 3 54. 43 5. 34 25. 41 5. 40 23. 74 6. 41 .28 . 20 . 04 . 12 . 22 . 18 . 39 . 28 . 16 . 03 . 12 . 05 . 18 . 16 .19 . 10 . 06 . 33 . 31 . 28 . 05 . 03 . 06 . 09 . 01 . 08 . 21 .14 . 05 . 37 . 05 . 21 . 09 . 15 . 07 . 09 . 07 . 05 . 14 .19 . 06 . 15 . 02 . 19 . 10 . 23 . 07 . 18 . 05 . 00 .06 . 29 . 13 . 10 . 27 . 25 . 29 . 09 . 12 . 03 .45 . 55 . 25 . 03 . 01 . 01 . 05 . 03 . 41 .43 . 21 . 01 . 15 . 01 . 12 . 12 . 24 .31 . 22 . 04 . 21 . 01 . 07 . 41 .07 . 05 . 07 . 03 . 08 . 54 .16 . 87 . 11 . 13 . 04 .24 . 54 . 14 . 11 . 11 . 10 . 09 .05 . 09 . 18 1, male Note. N 133. Correlations greater than . 7 are significant at p . 05; those greater than . 21 are significant at p 0; Hierarchical status: subordinate 1, supervisor 0; CPI California Psychological Inventory. .01. Gender: female 896 KIM AND GLOMB Table 2 Results of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Victimization Victimization Variable Gender Tenure (years) Age (years) Hierarchical status Negative affectivity Positive affectivity Job stress Workgroup stress Organizational stress Aggression engagement Cognitive ability Agency (index) Commu nion (index) Cognitive Ability Agency Cognitive Ability Communion R2 R2 Model 1 0. 2 . 03 . 09 . 55 . 11 . 03 . 35 . 03 . 24 . 62 Model 2 1. 16 . 01 . 09 . 81 . 12 . 05 . 37 . 10 . 25 . 60 . 17 . 08 . 21 . 46 . 04 Model 3 1. 06 . 02 . 09 1. 09 . 15 . 04 . 43 . 18 . 27 . 60 . 15 . 06 . 26 . 02 . 05 . 50 . 04 .42 Note. N 133. Regression coefficients are unstandardized because standard regression coefficients are invalid with the cluster option (see Glomb & Liao, 2003; W. H. Rogers, 1993). Gender: female 1, male 0; Hierarchical status: subordinate 1, supervisor 0. p . 05. p . 01 (two-tailed test).Figure 2. The moderating role of communion personality traits on the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization. was marginally supported (b 0. 01, p . 10). Hypothesis 5, which predicts the moderating role of communion personality traits on the association between cognitive ability and victimization, was supported (b – 0. 03, p . 05). Discussion The primary purpose of this study was to examine the role of cognitive ability in workplace victimization, a topic that has received scant research attention.Cognitive ability predicts many job and real-life outcomes (see Brand, 1987), and thus, it is important to include in the portfolio of variables associated with victimization, such as personality, demographics, behaviors, and organizational characteristics (see Aquino & Thau, 2009; Bowling & Beehr, 2006). Consistent with a victim precipitation model, our results suggest that cognitive ability is associated with workplace victimization. We also tested the relationship between agency and communion—two interpersonally oriented personality dimensions—and victimization.Consistent with a negative reciprocity cycle and a provocative victim typology, our results suggest that individuals high in agency personality traits experience victimization at work. Counter to expectations, we did not find a significant relationship between communion and lower victimization in our primary analyses. This nonsignificant finding may be explained by the positive–negative asymmetry effect (see Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Fickenauer, & Vohs, 2001; Taylor, 1991), which would suggest that positive interpersonal interactions carry less weight than negative social interactions, and therefore, it may cause a nonsignificant finding.The nonsignificant findings may also be caused by the broad communion measure, the components of which might evidence differential relationships with victimization. A previous study found that victimization is significantly associated with agreeableness ( – . 21, p . 05) but is not significantly associated with conscientiousness and emotional stability ( – . 02 and . 10, respectively; Figure 1. The moderating role of agency personality traits on the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization. COGNITIVE ABILITY AND VICTIMIZATION 897Table 3 Supplemental Analysis Results of Hierarchical Regress ion Analysis for Victimization Victimization Variable Gender Tenure (years) Age (years) Hierarchical status Negative affectivity Positive affectivity Job stress Workgroup stress Organizational stress Aggression engagement Cognitive ability Agency (CPI Dominance) Communion (CPI Communality) Cognitive Ability Agency Cognitive Ability Communion R2 R2 Model 4 1. 33 . 01 . 11 . 46 . 11 . 00 . 34 . 14 . 28 . 61 . 15 . 11 . 18 . 48 . 06 Model 5 1. 24 . 02 . 08 . 36 . 14 . 00 . 35 . 18 . 30 . 61 . 12 . 10 . 18 . 1†  . 03 . 50 . 02†  outcomes, rather than the more distal individual difference of cognitive ability, that are mediating explanatory variables. Future work might explore whether high performance, ability, and achievement in other domains adhere to similar processes (cf. Feather, 1994, on tall poppies). Theoretical Implications This study contributes to the cognitive ability, personality, and workplace victimization literatures in a variety of ways. First, we extend the sc ope of the victim precipitation model by proposing and testing the possibility of smart victims.Second, contrary to the existing cognitive ability literature, our finding indicates a potential downside to high cognitive ability (e. g. , for another possible exception, such as clever concealer effects, see Wilson & Herrnstein, 1985). This study moves cognitive ability research in a new direction by positing and testing a potential downside to high cognitive ability in the workplace. Third, in our study we examined two broad interpersonally oriented personality dimensions— agency and communion—and their association with workplace victimization.Although personality researchers have confirmed that the agency and communion model is useful in terms of investigating interpersonally oriented outcomes (see Abele & Wojciszke, 2007; Bruch, 2002; Digman, 1997; Helgeson, 1994; Wiggins, 1991), this model is currently less popular than the Big Five model in organizational scholarship , perhaps because of the absence of an agreed upon operationalization of these multidimensional traits (see Helgeson, 1994; Saragovi et al. , 1997).Although the Big Five is certainly a useful taxonomy, because we are interested in workplace victimization and the interpersonal relationships between victims and perpetrators, the agency and communion framework may be useful for future victimization research. Fourth, the interplay of two key individual differences— cognitive ability and personality traits— on victimization provides an integration of two complementary theories, which adhere to the social and personality psychological models of social interactions. Although previous workplace victimization literature integrated the victim precipitation model with structural theory (e. g. Aquino, 2000; Aquino et al. , 1999), and reciprocity theory with structural theory (e. g. , Aquino & Bommer, 2003), the integration of the victim precipitation model and reciprocity theory h as not received research attention. In this study, we take the first step by integrating victim precipitation with reciprocity theory to demonstrate the interactive effects of cognitive ability and agency– communion personality traits on workplace victimization. This approach is consistent with social psychological literature suggesting the multiplicative effect of competence and likeability on social interactions (see Casciaro & Lobo, 2008; Fiske et al. 2006). Note. N 133. Regression coefficients are unstandardized because standard regression coefficients are invalid with the cluster option (see Glomb & Liao, 2003; W. H. Rogers, 1993). Gender: female 1, male 0; Hierarchical status: subordinate 1, supervisor 0; CPI California Psychological Inventory. †  p . 10. p . 05. p . 01 (two-tailed test). Jensen-Campbell et al. , 2002), which are captured in our index. These results are consistent with our supplemental analysis; when we adopted the specific scale of Communion (i. e . CPICommunality for agreeableness; see Wiggins, 1991), we found a significant relationship between communion and victimization (b – 0. 18, . 15, p . 05). More studies are necessary to have greater confidence in the relationship between communion personality traits and victimization at work. Finally, our results demonstrate the moderating effects of agency and communion on the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization. Results suggest that the relationship between cognitive ability and victimization is exacerbated by agency personality traits, which is manifested in self-oriented behaviors (i. . , independence, dominance, capacity for status, and social presence) in a work group. Conversely, results suggest that the increased propensity to be victimized because of one’s high cognitive ability can be mitigated by communion personality traits, which is manifested in other-oriented or â€Å"team player† behavior (i. e. , communality, responsibility, and socialization) in a work group. We acknowledge that we do not study possible mediating mechanisms and that cognitive ability may be operating as a proxy for other variables relevant to workplace success.For example, it may be that high-performing individuals, rather than high-cognitiveability individuals, are those who are most likely to be the targets of interpersonal aggression. Similar theoretical processes of social comparison would also apply to high performance, but in this case, cognitive ability operates as a proxy for performance. As noted, cognitive ability is related to myriad positive outcomes on the job, and we acknowledge that it may be those proximal favorable job Organizational ImplicationsIn the 1950 movie Harvey, Jimmy Stewart’s character Elwood Dowd says, â€Å"Years ago my mother used to say to me . . . She’d say ‘In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant. ’ Well, for years I was smart . . . I recommend pleasa nt. † On the basis of our findings, we recommend that if you are going to be â€Å"oh-so smart† then you should also be â€Å"oh-so pleasant† to avoid workplace victimization. Beyond individual advice, the results also have important practical implications for managers. First, 898 KIM AND GLOMB managers need to be aware of this potential dark side of high cognitive ability at work.Managers are familiar with the positive side of high cognitive ability, but initial evidence of smart victims suggests managers may need to be on the lookout for and take precautions to deter the workplace victimization of smart employees. The strong and consistent relationship between cognitive ability and many elements of performance suggests that these individuals may be among the most important to keep satisfied, productive, and retained. Tactics helpful in preventing the victimization of high-cognitive-ability employees may reduce both the proximal and distal costs of workplace vic timization.Second, our results suggest that high cognitive ability does not predestine employees to be victimized—their personality also plays a role. Although managers attend to personality during the selection process because it predicts job performance (see Dunn, Mount, Barrick, & Ones, 1995), our results suggest that personality can also have either a protective (i. e. , communion) or intensifying (i. e. , agency) role in victimization. We do not suggest that organizations should not select applicants who are high in agency traits because they are more vulnerable to victimization at work.Personality traits have their own bright and dark sides (see Judge & LePine, 2007). For example, although our results show that employees who are high in agency traits are more likely to be victims at work, research also shows that traits under the agency umbrella are associated with being a leader (e. g. , extraversion; Judge, Bono, Ilies, & Gerhardt, 2002). Further, although high-abilit y employees who are also high in communion are less likely to be victims at work, research also suggests that traits under the communion umbrella are associated with the use of more lenient standards to evaluate coworker performance (e. . , agreeableness; Bernardin, Cooke, & Villanova, 2000). Thus, organizations need to consider both the benefits and costs of the communion and agency personality traits of employees and to be aware of their correlates, both favorable and unfavorable. Regardless of the composition of agency and communion in the workforce, organizations can attempt to modify individual behaviors by creating strong situations (e. g. , human resource practices, organization culture) that minimize the link between personality and behaviors and that enhance positive reciprocity norms between employees.Limitations and Future Directions This study is not without limitation. First, range restriction in cognitive ability may cause reduced sample correlations. However, given th at range restriction reduces the strength of relationships because of limited variance (Sackett & Yang, 2000), this seems to be a minor issue. Further, the degree of variability of cognitive ability is similar to that in other studies (e. g. , Chan, 1997; Mumford, Van Iddekinge, Morgeson, & Campion, 2008; Sackett & Ostgaard, 1994). Second, the external validity of these findings is limited.This data set is small and is from a predominantly Caucasian sample of health care workers. The sample is also predominantly female, which may have influenced effects; women high in cognitive ability and agency may be particularly prone to victimization because of gender stereotypes (see Broverman, Vogel, Broverman, Clarkson, & Rosenkrantz, 1972). The context of a health care home is interesting because employees may be more empathetic and less competitive given self-selection into this caring profession.They are also more likely to be exposed to victimization; the health care industry continually reports some of the highest levels of workplace aggression and victimization (see Rippon, 2000), though victimization is often perpetrated by patients, and in our study we examined victimization from coworkers and supervisors. Examining our relationships in other business contexts and groups is necessary. Third, the construct validity of our agency and communion measures may be questioned.Given that there is not a generally accepted method of transforming the CPI scales into the broad indices of agency and communion, we created our own measures guided by previous literature and linkages of the content of the scales (e. g. , Digman, 1997; Gough & Bradley, 1996; Hough & Ones, 2001). In the field of personality psychology, there have been calls for the development and study of agency and communion scales (see Helgeson, 1994); we concur and believe the development of valid and concise measures of agency and communion traits might promulgate the use of these interpersonally oriented per sonality constructs.Fourth, measures were self-report from a single source, and thus, common method bias is a potential problem. However, cognitive ability and personality traits were measured for personnel selection, and perceived victimization was measured 22 months later, on average (i. e. , average tenure is 22 months). Because there are large temporal and psychological distances between cognitive ability and perceived victimization measures, the impact of common method bias is not a major concern (see Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003).We also controlled for positive affectivity and negative affectivity, which also impact the cognitive perception and reporting processes (Bowling & Beehr, 2006; Isen, 1987; Podsakoff & Organ, 1986; Schmitt, 1994; Spector, 1994; Watson & Clark, 1984). As Schmitt (1994) suggested, the appropriateness of methods should be based on the stage of development of the research; given the lack of research in this area, self-report data would be deemed acceptable. Further, as noted by others (e. . , Aquino & Lamertz, 2004; Spector, 1994), it is difficult to envision circumstances in which non-self-report data w