A feasibility study of a conditional reasoning measure of aggressiveness and prosociability

The feasibility of a conditional reasoning measure of aggressiveness and prosociability was tested on patrol officers (N=144) employed by a large, Southeastern utility company. Eight of the fourteen conditional reasoning problems written for this administration had correlations with various performance criteria that were both significant and in the predicted direction. Specifically, aggressive solutions to conditional reasoning problems were negatively correlated with patrol officer activity (e.g., arrests, investigations), supervisor performance ratings, and supervisor rankings. In contrast, prosocial solutions to these same conditional reasoning problems were positively correlated with the criteria. These results suggest that the aggressive solutions were predictive of low or poor performance and perhaps indirect or passive aggressive behavior. Content analysis suggested that the problems designed to elicit aggressive individuals' hostile attribution biases were the most predictive.