Universit de Poitiers

Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

Centre de Recherche Sur la Cognition et lApprentissage

Rapport technique : 2008/01/C.ESN

Organizational citizenship behavior: Social valorization arnong pupils and the effect on teachers' judgments
Catherine Esnard and Stpane Jouffre, Universit de Poitiers - Centre de Recherche sur la Cognition et lapprentissage (CeRCA/ UMR CNRS 6234)

A paratre dans / To appear in : Esnard, C., & Jouffre, S.. Organizational citizenship behavior : social valorization among pupils and the effect on teachers judgments. European Journal of Psychology of Education.

Address for correspondence to the first author at: Catherine Esnard Centre de Recherches sur la Cognition et lApprentissage 99 avenue du Recteur Pineau 86000 Poitiers France catherine.esnard@univ-poitiers.fr.

KEYWORDS:
paradigm.

Evaluative authority, Judge paradigm, Organisational citizenship behavior, Pupils, Self-presentation

ABSTRACT
In this article, the concept of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) is transposed .from a work context, in which it was developed, to secondary school. Two studies test the assumption of a social valorization of OCB dclaration in a school context. In Study 1. 445 pupils (sixth-graders t0 ninth-graders) answered an OCB questionnaire. specifically designed for this population, according to the three instructions of the self:presentation paradigm. The ANOVAs indicated (I) a higher frequency of declared OCBs for girls Chan for boys, which decreases with school grade. and is higher for the dimension of Organizational Compliance. and (2) a significant OCR clearsightedness, more significant when presenting oneself to teachers than to parents and peers, and higher for Individutil Development, Altruism and Organizational Compliance dimensions. In Study 2, 46 teachers examined the report of a fictitious pupil expressing a high or low frequency of OCB (judge paradigm). The ANOVAs indicated that Me teachers' judgement was more favorable towards the pupil expressing high rather Chan low frequency of OCB. The normative component of OCB, the social and institutional function which the OCB can can fulfill, and the evaluation devices in secondary school are then discussed.

Respect for others and for public rules is some sort of guarantee against acts of violence and incivility in any organization. These socially expected attitudes and behaviors represent highly valued, but implicit, social skills. The objective of this article is to examine the role of evaluation in the appearance of such social skills, specifically in a school context. Up until the stars of the new school year in 20061, which is when we examined this subject, these social skills were outside any prescribed rules or proscriptions registered in the establishment's list of regulations. They are then close to the Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCB) defined in the literature in a work context. At first, we shah consider this applicability by clarifying the definition of OCB. Next we shah develop the central theoretical argument of this study by drawing a parallel between research investigating the relationships between OCB and evaluative processes on the one hand and those with school evaluations on the other.

ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIORS : DEFINITION , DIMENSIONS AND CONTEXTS

The concept of Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) was developed to report, in a professional domain, "individual behaviour that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization" (Organ, 1988, p. 4). More precisely, these behaviors contribute "to the maintenance and enhancement of the social and psychological context that supports task performance" (Organ, 1997, p. 91). They belong to the category of contextual performances, which, contrary to task performances, do not refer directly to formai expeetations of the job, but contribute to the evaluation of the overall professional performance. The definitions of OCB in many North American studies are based on a variety of dimensions. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, and Fetter's (1990) definitions, based on the initial conceptualizations of Organ (1988), are the ones used most frequently. We shall use a more recent version constructed with seven dimensions (Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000), and summarized in a French study (Dagot & Vonthron, 2001). The
1

French schools are now asked to classify these social skills amidst academic skills by recording them in the conventional marking system in the form of a "school life mark".

seven dimensions are as foliows: Altruism (helping behavior); Sportsmanship (no cornplaints about working conditions); Organizational Loyalty (e.g., a speech favorable to the organization); Organizational Compliance (the acceptance and respect for rules and procedures in the organization); Individual Initiative (make more chan what is required or surpass oneself, be creative); Civic Virtue (general interest in the organization); and Self Development (voluntary commitment in training initiatives, be infonned about innovations concerning your domain). A number of empirical studies are based on another classification in two dimensions (Smith, Organ, & Near, 1983; William & Anderson, 1991): OCHs with interpersonal orientation, such as Altruism and Courtesy, and OCBs directed towards the organization such as Civic Virtue or Sportsmanship. It seems that now, on the basis of meta-analyses results a reconsidered view of OCBs dimensions is emerging (LePine, Erez, & Johnson, 2002; Ho!Tman, Blair, Meriac, & Woehr, 2007). This is primarily following the example of Motowidlo (2000) and Organ (1997) who regard OCBs, overall, as equivalent indicators of a general inclination towards mutual assistance and cooperation in an organization.

ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIORS AND EVALUATIVE PROCESSES

Many studies attest to the fact that OCBs contribute to performance (Podsakoff & Mackenzie, 1994; Walz & Niehoff, 1996; Podsakoff, Ahearne & Mackenzie, 1997), so the individual as part of a collective. It is recognized that an improvement of performance partially depends on the position the employee takes in an organization, notably his informal participation relating to work content and decisions within the hierarchical framework of a relationship with a superior (for a summary, see Cotton, Vollrath, Froggatt, Lenggnick-Hall & Jennings, 1988). This informal participation is comparable, to a certain extent, to the production of OCBs, these being part of the general relationship of dependence on evaluation. Indeed, to have credible Organizational Compliance and, more generally, a favorable evaluation from colleagues - maybe more specifically from superiors - can contribute to employee satisfaction and involvement and thus to a good functioning of the organization as well as to better individual performance. In other words, OCBs would contribute to performance because of the positive evaluations which they generate. The place of OCBs in evaluative processes within work organizations is widely informed. The measure of the part of the OCB taken into account in the overall evaluation of an employee has been made the object of several empirical studies which reach similar conclusions. Based on a meta-analysis of eleven studies, Podsakoff et al. (2000) find that, on average, OCBs would contribute for about 42.9 % of the performance assessment of an employee. This is independent of the objective task performance which accounts for 9.5 % of the evaluation variance, the combination of OCBs and objective performances accounting for, on average, 61.2% of the total variance of the evaluation of the employees 2. Besides, an experimental study driven by Dagot and Vonthron (2001) show a significant effect of the interaction between OCBs and task performance on the prediction of professional development. The production of OCBs would allow a more positive evaluation, especially if performance was high. Moreover this evaluative relationship seems dependent on well known sociological determinisms. Concerning gender, for example, the relationship between commitment to OCB and positive evaluation of performances would be detrimental for women. Although producing more OCB than men, women are not better assessed than men (Lovell, Kahn, Anton, Davidson, Dowling, Post, & and Mason, 1999). Besides, a recent study shows that the relationship between OCB production (organization focused) and gaining a promotion is more significant for men compared to women (Allen, 2006). The links between OCBs and evaluative processes are also observable through the expectations of rewards. For Bateman and Organ (1983), it is satisfaction connected to promotion and supervision that are correlated the most with the rate of citizenship behaviors. The perception of organizational justice would have, however, a crucial role. The level of OCBs is lower when decisions are considered to have been taken in an inequitable way (Zellars, Tepper, & Duffy, 2002). However, some acquired capacities also seem to contribute to the emission of OCB. A good example would be
2

In this meta-analysis, Podsakoff et al. (2000) make some allowances for these results. They note by statistically controlling for the fact that measures of objective performances and OCBs come from the same source, the percentage of variance on overall evaluations explained by OCBs turns out to be considerably reduced. For example, the percentage reduces from 44 % to 9 % (MacKenzie, Podzakoff, & Fetter, 1993). Implementing this statistical control on 7 studies, therefore, results in 19.3 % of the variance of overall evaluations being accounted for by OCBs and 11.3 % by objective performances, and 46% for the total variance.

clearsightedness of the utility of such behaviors in obtaining rewards. So, Hui, Lam and Law (2000) showed that employees who perceived OCBs to be the most useful were the ones who conveyed them the most and those for whom the strongest decline of OCBs was observed after gaining the desired promotion. Furthermore, the decline was stronger for those who obtained the promotion than for others, as if the accepted effort in terms of OCBs had no utility once the reward was obtained.

STUDYING THE SOCIAL VALORIZATION OF A SUPPOSED NORMATIVE CONTENT

Firstly, these Iast results appeal for (I) a social knowledge, among the employees, of the pertinence in expressing OCB, and (2) the modulation of this expression according to the context (getting an expected outcome). Results such as these are close to the results obtained by resorting to the self-presentation paradigm in the sociocognitve approach to judgment norms (see Dubois, 2003), According to this approach, judgment norms refer to beliefs, opinions and values that have ta be expressed in social relationships and that involve power, evaluation and domination (Dubois, 2003). In the self-presentation paradigm, participants have to answer a questionnaire according to three instructions. They are asked initially to choose the response they prefer (standard instruction), thon to choose the response they feel will generate a positive image of themselves (pronormative instruction) and tinally to choose the response they feel will generate a negative image of themseives (counternormative instruction). The standard instruction helps assess normative expression. The difference between the pronormative and counternormative instructions enables an assessment of normative clearsightedness. The more significant this difference, the more clearsighted the participant (Py & Sornat, 1991), i.e., the greater his knowledge of the social valorization of social content. This paradigm aise can be used to study social function of content according to different contexts by manipulating (1) the referent of the selfpresentation instructions, and (2) the domain of occurrence of the questionnaire events. lndeed, the more social content is socially valued and expressed in specific contexts in comparison to other contexts, the more it finds its social function in these contexts. For example, in line with internality norm (Beauvois & Dubois, 1988), it was observed that individuals resort more to internal explanations following pronormative instructions and externat explanations following counternormative instructions. This is, however, in the following circumstances: (1) where they have to present themselves to institutional evaluators (teachers, supervisors, recruitment specialists) rather than noninstitutional evaluators (parents, peers); and (2) in explaining institutional events (academie, professional) radier than non-institutional events (family, leisure, social relations) (Dubois, 1988; Dubois, Loose, Matteuci, & Selleri, 2003; Flament, Jouffre & Py, 1998; Gilibert & Cambon, 2003). The evolution of normative expression and normative clearsightedness can also be studied using this paradigm. For example, in line with intemality norm, an increase of the internality expression and clearsightedness was observed between the fourth and firth- grade, then a decrease in sixthgrade prior te an increase between seventh and ninth-grade (Dubois, 1988; Dubois et al., 2003). Secondly, the meta-analysis by Podsakoff et al. (2000) suggests that the OCB declared by employees influences the overall evaluation from their superiors, as well as the objective and estimated performance. Such resuits indicate that OCB, as well as performance which is highly relevant in a professional setting, influences social judgment. These observations are comparable to these made in the judgment paradigm in the sociocognitive approach to judgment norms (see Gilibert & Cambon, 2003). In this paradigm, participants are asked to assess real or fictitious evaluees depicted with varying levels of expression of normative content. Using this paradigm has shown that, again in line with internality norm, the more internality is expressed, the more favorable the evaluation is in various settings: professional settings (Beauvois, Bourjade, & Pansu, 1991; Pansu 1997a,b; Pansu & Gilibert, 2002); academie settings (Bressoux & Pansu, 2003; Dompnier, Pansu, & Bressoux, 2006; Dubois & Le Poultier, 1991; Pansu, Bressoux, & Louche, 2003; Py & Somat, 1991, 1996), and in social services settings (Beauvois & Le Poultier, 1986). Moreover, this effect is particularly observed when looking at institutional judgments which refer to the target's capacity to satisfy, or not, the constraints of institutional functioning (social utility, see Beauvois, 1994, 1995). This is opposed to looking at interpersonal judgments which refer to an affective evaluation in terms of a participant's attraction, versus repulsion, towards a target (see Beauvois, 1994, 1995). For example, in a recruitment setting, Jouffre, Somat, and Teste (2008) observed that an internai candidate, compared to an externat one, is described more using social utility traits (e.g., active, ambitious, 4

authoritarian, dynamic, intelligent, hardworking: see Cambon, 2006; Gallay, 1994). Cornparably, there were less social desirability traits used (e.g., pleasant, attaching, honest, open-minded. sincere, sympathetic: see Cambon, 2006; Gallay, 1994).

TOWARDS A SOCIALLY VALUED CONCEPT OF OCBS IN A SCHOOL CONTEXT

Conceptualized in the 1980s to report certain individual work behaviors, OCBs have always been envisaged within organizations intending to produce commodities or to provide services (Bateman & Organ, 1983; Organ & Near, 1983). A school is an organization where it is not only the teachers working on imparting knowledge, but also the pupils whose task is in responding to the educational expectations of their teachers. Within this framework, many students behaviors, viewed on dimensions as defined by Podsakoff et al. (2000), in effect contribute to an effectively functioning school system. This is even without any institutional pressure as a result of a formal system of punishment or reward or any training plan for these behaviors. For example, the behaviors altruism, sportsmanship, organizational compliance and even individual initiative, ensure favorable conditions for the sort of learning desired by the teaching profession. Their absence or decline can be a source of regret but, however, they do not become the target of disciplinary measures which are reserved solely for negligence related to the establishments 3 internal regulations. In this way, the assessment of these behaviors is left to the discretion of teachers and their supervisors. The literature, however, reveals little research related to OCBs in school settings. Also, the measures of OCBs produced by teenagers or young adults are not frequent. One of the first objectives of this study is to compensate for these gaps. Furthermore, although outlined in a professional context (Dagot & Vonthron, 2001; Ehrhart & Naumann, 2004), the question of the social valuation of OCBs seems to find some credence when employees produce OCBs according to particular expectations (e.g., promotion prospect) and where this outcome is manipulated (i.e. the expected reward is received or not). In fact, the objective is to investigate the measure in which OCB declaration can be likened to a standard of judgment that reverts to beliefs emitted more particularly in institutional reports and which influences the institutional evaluators judgment on a person. Thus, in the first study, we resorted to the self-presentation paradigm with the aim of investigating if the declaration of OCB among schoolchildren was the object of clearsightedness. This refers to the knowledge of their socially valued character, more specifically when they are placed in a context governed by institutional reports and power. In a second study, a judgment paradigm was used in order to examine in which measures and according to which criteria these students declarations of OCBs affected the teachers judgments.

STUDY 1 OVERVIEW , AIMS AND HYPOTHESES

In the first study, pupils from sixth to ninth-grade had to answer an OCBs questionnaire, specifically designed for this study, with three instructions (from the self-presentation paradigm). Three referents were manipulated in the selfpresentation instructions: teachers, parents, and peers. We expected the pupils to be clearsighted of the social valorization of declaring OCBs. The difference between the declaration of OCBs under pronormative instruction and counternormative instruction should be significant and positive (hypothesis 1). Nevertheless, this clearsightedness should be sensitive to the referent of the self-presentation paradigm. If the "teacher" referent plays a major role in the academic system and then influences the OCBs production, it is likely that the parents may have an important influence on the pupil's conduct. This is in addition to the peers who represent a relevant evaluative referent due to the necessities of social integration. The pupils' clearsightedness, then,

The "school life mark" recently established in French schools "measures the students assiduousness, his respect for internal regulations" but it is also clarifies that it "takes into account participation in the life of the establishment (decreed May 12th, 2006). Within the framework of this latter measure, some behaviours, covering initially OCBs, tend to become disciplinary behaviors. Only careful observation of the ways of enforcing this measure will inform us about this point.

should be higher when they present themselves to teachers rather than parents and peers (hypothesis 2). Increase in school level should have an effect on the reporting of OCBs and OCB clearsightedness. If OCBs are normative, they should be socially leamed, as was observed for intemality (see Dubois, 1994). So then OCB clearsightedness and the number of OCBs reported following a standard instruction should increase with school level (hypothesis 3). Finally, as indicated by some results (Lovell et al., 1999), the frequency of OCBs (standard instruction) and OCB clearsightedness is expected to be higher for girls than for boys (hypothesis 4).

METHOD
PARTICIPANTS
Four hundred and forty-five pupils (Boys: 51%; Girls: 49%) participated in this study. They came from three secondary schools: a private school (33.6%) and 2 Iocated in ZEP (Zone d'Education Prioritaire: a designated area for special educational needs) (respectively 30.8% and 35.6%). Among the pupils, 31% were sixth-graders, 25% seventh-graders, 26% eighth-graders, and 18% ninth-graders. Ten pupils from CNF 4 were eliminated from the analysis.

MATERIAL
Because there is no OCBs scale adapted for an academie setting, we first designed a set of items that referred to OCB declaration according to Organ's (1988) criteria and the dimensions identified by Podsakoff et al. (2000), and then validated these items using pupils from secondary school. Then, as in LePine et al. (2002), examining separatly the different OCB dimensions permits to be closest from the declared contextual performance. Firstly, we rewrote the seven dimensions in words understandable by the younger pupils from secondary school, i.e., sixth-graders. Items were then created (27 in total) corresponding to these categories and referring to daily school situations. Ninety-seven pupils from sixth to ninth-grade, and from two distinct secondary schools (private versus public), participated in this pre-test. Pupils were instructed to match each of the 27 items with one or more categories. It was specified that it was possible to match an item with no category if none of them seemed relevant (this instruction was given verbally). They were also asked to note the situation(s): (1) which could result in punishment; and (2) which never occur. In order to keep the most representative items of each category and the items which satisfy the delinition of OCBs (individuai hehavior that is not officially demanded and does not lead to reward or punishment), we established 3 selection criteria: (1) the item must be classified in one category by more than 50% of the pupils and must not be classified in another category by more than 25% of the pupils; (2) the situation described in the item must not lead to rewards or punishments; and (3) the non-response rate for an item must not be greater than 20% of the pupils. The selection criteria resulted in twelve items remaining which refer to six of Podsakoff et al. (2000) seven categories: Altruism, Sportsmanship, Organizational Loyalty, Organizational Compliance, Civic Virtue, and Self Development (see Table 1).

Pupils from CNF are non native French speakers. They follow specific courses to learn French and thus may encounter difficulties in reading and understanding the questionnaire and instructions .

Table 1 OCB main dimensions (from Podzakoff et al., 2000) adapted to secondary school and retained items Categories of Podsakoff et al (2001) Adapted formulations for secondary school Items -Jaide mon voisin de classe comprendre son exercice (hors contrle) Aider les autres ou ne pas les aider - Il y a un nouveau, il est perdu, je vais lui parler. - Je vais vers ceux qui sont seuls en rcr - Quand un camarade est bless, je laide porter son cartable -Je me plains davoir sans arrt travailler -Je rle parce que jai trop de devoirs -Je dis que les professeurs ont raison. -Je pense que les surveillants ont raison -Jattends que mon professeur me donne la parole pour rpondre - Joublie damener la mallette (le cahier dabsence) quand cest mon tour - Je me prsente llection de dlgu de classe - Je mavance dans mes devoirs Aucun item retenu

Altruism

Sportsmanship

Se plaindre ou non Donner raison aux profs et surveillants ou non

Organizational Loyalty

Organizational Compliance

Respecter le rglement ou ne pas le respecter Sintresser la vie du collge ou ne pas sy intresser Vouloir apprendre ou pas Etre cratif, se dpasser

Civic Virtue Self Development Individual Initiative

This questionnaire was administered to the pupils in order to check if they understood the items. Ninth-graders from two forms had to complete the questionnaire according to a standard instruction (to give their opinion with no right or wrong answer), and had to express their opinion on the questionnaire's presentation and clarity. Such a procedure resulted in emended instructions and the final version of the questionnaire (see Table 1), This final questionnaire contains 12 items and some demographic questions (e.g., gender and form). The following instruction was given with this questionnaire: "Now, there is a series of 12 situations. You have to indicate if you do what is written: never, not often, quite often, often, very often, always. For each of these situations, put a circle round the answer which seems to suit you".

PROCEDURE
Participants were tested in groups either at the beginning or at the end of an Art class in ZEP schools and during "class life" in private schools5. According to how the questionnaires were distributed, a third of pupils were instructed to

The hour of class life runs every other week in the presence of the main teacher, for all groups of pupils. II is devoted ta methodology, following through pupils' work, and giving course or careers guidance. The class content is not predefmed and, h ence, more flexible.

answer the OCBs questionnaire as if seeking approval versus disapproval from their teachers, another third from their parents, and the remaining third from their peers. The standard instruction was always given first, whereas the other instructions were counterhalanced. Once this task was completed, the pupils were debriefed.

VARIABLES
Four independent variables were considered. The first, a between-subjects independent variable, referred to gender (boys versus girls). The pupils' school level was a second between-subjects independent variable with four modatities: sixth-grade versus seventh-grade versus eighth-grade versus ninth-grade. A third, within-subjeets, independent variable was the OCBs dimension: Organizational Compliance, Organizational Loyalty, Civic Virtue, Altruism, Self Development, and Sportsmanship. The referent of the self-presentation instructions was a fourth between-subjects independent variable: Teachers versus Parents versus Peers. Two dependent variables were considered. The first was the mean frequency of OCBs following the standard instruction. One point was given when pupils chose "never", 2 points when they chose "not often" etc., and 6 points when they chose "always". The second dependent variable was the OCBs clearsightedness. It was calculated by subtracting the mean frequency of the OCBs (following counternormative instruction) from the mean frequency of the OCBs (following pronormative instruction). The mean OCBs clearsightedness could vary from -6 to +6.

RESULTS
Deelared frequency of OCBs A 2(Gender) * 4(School level) * 6(OCB dimension) analysis of variance was performed on the frequencies of OCBs6. Firstly, the significant effect of gender [(F(1,414)=4.94, p<.03, 2=.01] indicates that girls (M=3.48, SD=0.50) reported a frequency of OCBs higher than boys (M=3.42, SD=0.56). Secondly, the effect of school level is significant [F(3,414)=15.86, p<.001, 2 = 10]. No change is observed between sixth-grade (M=3.77, SD=0.74) and seventh-grade (M=3.79, SD=0.80), whereas a significant decrease is observed in the fourth-grade (M=3.55, SD=0.71, ps<,02) which persists in ninth-grade (M=3.20, SD=1.58, ps<.002). Thirdly, the effect of OCB dimensions is significant [F(5,2070)= 149.06, p<.001, 2 = 28]. Pupils deelared more Compliance behaviors (M=4.51, SD=1.09) than Sportsmanship (M=4.14, SD=1.33, p<.00I) and Self Development (M=3.95, SD=1.53, p<.001), which do not differ significantly. These latter behavior dimensions occur more than Altruism (M=3.37, SD=1.01, ps<.0I), which itself occurs more than Loyalty (M=3.09, SD=1.28, ps<.01). Civic Virtue is the least expressed OCB (M=2.47, SD=1 .91, ps<.001). The interaction between gender and OCB dimensions is significant [F(5,2070)=3.07, p<.01, 2=.011. The analysis does not reveal any significant differences between boys and girls whatever the OCB dimension is. Nevertheless, the hierarchy observed above differs between boys and girls. For girls [F(5,1070)=81.10, p<.001], the frequency of OCBs is higher for Compliance (M=4.56, SD=1.07) than for Sportsmanship (M=4.1 I, SD=1.34, p<.02) and Development (M=3.81, SD=1.54, p<.001), which do not differ significantly. These latter behavior dimensions are, again, reported more than Altruism (M=3.19, SD=1.04,ps<.001) and Loyalty (M=3.05, SD=1.37, ps<.001), which do not differ significantly. Civic Virtue is the least reported OCB (M=2.49, SD=1.94, ps<.001). Similarly, for boys [F(5,1040)=77.53, p<.001], the frequency of OCBs is higher for Compliance (M=4.47, SD=1.10). Sportsmanship (M=4.17, SD=1.34) and Development (M=4.10, SD=1.51) than for Altruism (M=3.56, SD=0.93, ps<.001). None or the first three dimensions differ significantly. Altruism is reported more than Loyalty (M=3.13, SD=I.20,ps<.03) whereas Civic Virtue has the Iowest frequency of all the OCBs (M=2.45, SD=1.88, ps<.001).

The effect of school level was hypothesized, therefore a priori comparisons were calculated, whereas the Bonferroni procedure was adopted for the OCB dimension effect.

Finally, the interaction between school level and OCB dimensions is significant [F(15,2070)=3.63, p<.001, 2=.03]. The means are reported in Table 2. Table 2 Mean (standard deviation) declared frequency of OCBs by school level and OCB dimension

Compliance Loyalty Development Altruism Sportsmanship Civic virtue

Sixth-graders 4.85 (1.00) 3.47(1.17) 4.03 (1.55) 3.36 (1.02) 4.34 (1.37) 2.52 (2.00)

Seventh-graders 4.44 (1.15) 3.36 (1.28) 4.27 (1.39) 3.55 (0.99) 4.27 (1.46) 2.94 (2.05)

Eigth-graders 4.47 (0.98) 2.87 (1.23) 4.02 (1.42) 3.32 (0.98) 4.22 (1.02) 2.13 (1.68)

Ninth-graders 4.10(1.12) 2.34 (1.17) 3.21 (1.65) 3.20 (1.01) 3.71 (1.33) 2.14 (1.71)

The analysis indicates that no significant difference was observed between different school levels for Compliance, Development, Altruism, Sportsmanship and Civic Virtue. This is even if the effect of school level is significant for some of these OCB dimensions [Compliance F(3,426)=8.55, p<.001; Development F(3,426)=8.25, p<.001; Altruism F(3,426)=2.03, n.s.; Sportsmanship F(3,426)=3.41, p<.02; and Civic Virtue F(3,426)=4.28, p<.006]. For Loyalty, the significant effect of school level [F(3,426)=17.24, p<.001] shows that only sixth-graders have more OCBs than thirdgraders (p<.006). Nevertheless, it was observed that as school level increases there is fess distinction between the OCB dimensions. Sixth-graders declared a higher frequency for Compliance than for Sportsmanship and Development (ps<.02), which do not differ significantly. These latter two behaviors are reported more than Altruism and Loyalty (p.s<.06), which also do not differ significantly. Civic Virtue is the least reported of the OCBs (ps<.001). Seventh-graders and eighth-graders reported a higher frequency for Compliance, Sportsmanship and Development, which do not differ significantly, than for Altruism, Loyalty and Civic Virtue (ps<.006), which also do not differ significantly. Similarly, ninthgraders recorded a higher frequency for Compliance. Sportsmanship, Development and Altruism, which do not ditTer significantly, than for Loyalty and Civic Virtue (ps<.005), which also do not differ significantly. No other interaction was significant.

OCB CLEARSIGHTEDNESS
Firstly, OCB clearsightedness appeared positive and significantly different from zero for all conditions (0.66<Ms<3.47, ts>2.46, ps<.02), except for ninth-graders' Loyalty clearsightedness (M=0.06, t(140)=0.26, n.s.). A 2(Gender) * 4(School level) * 6(OCB dimensions) * 3(Referent) analysis of variance was performed on the OCB clearsightedness7. The analysis indicates no significant effect of gender [F(1,388)=2.47, n.s.] and school level [F(3,388)<1]. The significant effect of referent [F(2,388)=38.71, p<.001, 2=.17] indicates that pupils are more OCB clearsighted when the referents are teachers (M=3.15. SD=1.64) compared to when the referents are parents (M=2.68, SD=1.73, p<.05). Weakcr OCB clearsightedness was observed when pupils presented themselves to peers (M=1.22, SD=2.30, ps<.001). The effect of OCB dimensions is significant [F(5,1940)=30.60, p<.001, ) 2=.07]. The OCB clearsightedness is higher for Development (M=2.86, SD=2.48), which does not differ from Altruism (M=2.67, SD=2.06) and Compliance (M=2.56, SD=2.34), than for
7

The effect of school level and clearsightedness was hypothesized, therefore a priori comparisons were calculated, whereas the Bonferroni procedure was adopted for the OCB dimensions effect.

Sportsmanship (M=2.33, SD=2.63, p<.001), Civic Virtue (M=1.79, SD=2.86, p<.001) and Loyalty (M=1.80, SD=2.70, p<.001). The OCB clearsightedness for Development and Compliance is higher than for Civic Virtue and Loyalty (ps<.001). This pattern is sensitive to referent as indicated by the significant interaction between OCB dimensions and referent [F(10,1940)=4.26, p<.001, 2=.02]. The means are reported in Table 3. Table 3 Mean (standard deviation) clearsightedness of OCBs by instance and OCB dimension

Teachers Compliance Loyalty Development Altruism Sportsmanship Civic virtue 3.33 2,93 3.47 3.20 3.07 2.58 (1.88) (2.07) (2.19) (1.78) (2.25) (2.54)

Parents 2,80 2.36 3.30 2.75 2.73 2.11 (2.06) (2.11) (1.98) (1.89) (2.34) (2,47)

Peers 1.55 (2.66) 0.06 (2.96) 1.79 (2.86) 2.03 (2.33) 1.16 (2.88) 0.66 (3.19)

Firstly, the analysis indicates no significant difference according to the referent for Compliance, Development and Altruism, even if the effect of referent is significant [Compliance: F(2,427)=24.07, p<.001; Development: F(2,427)=21.88, p<.001; Altruism: F(2,427)=12.24, p<.001]. For Sportsmanship [F(2,427)=23.60, p<.001] and Civic Virtue [F(2,427)=19.13, p<.001]. Pupils are more clearsighted when the referents are teachers rather than peers (ps<.08). No other significant differences emerge. For Loyalty [F(2,427)=56.01, p<.001], pupils are more OCB clearsighted when the referents are teachers or parents rather than peers (ps<.01). Secondly, when they had to present themselves to teachers or parents, a relative absence of differentiation according to the OCB dimensions was observed. Indeed, in the former case (teachers), only the OCB clearsightedness for Development, Compliance and Altruistn is higher than the OCB clearsightedness for Civic Virtue (ps<.05). In the latter case (parents), only the OCB clearsightedness for Development, Compliance, Altruism and Sportsmanship is higher than the OCB clearsightedness for Civic Virtue (ps<.05). When pupils had to present themselves to peers, a stronger differentiation was observed: OCB clearsightedness is higher for Altruism than for Sportsmanship, Civic Virtue and Loyalty (ps<.001), and it is higher for Development and Compliance than for Loyalty and Civic Virtue (ps<.001). Finally, the interaction between school level and OCB dimensions is significant [F(15,1940)=1.69, p<.05, 2=.01]. The means are reported in Table 4. Table 4 Mean (standard deviation) clearsightedness of OCBs by school level and OCB dimension

Sixth-graders Seventh- graders Eigth-graders Ninth-graders Compliance Loyalty Development Altruism Sportsmanship Civic virtue 2.68 (2.12) 2.22 (2.39) 3.03 (2.05) 2.78 (1.81) 2.31 (2.44) 1.98 (2,74) 2.74 (2.44) 1.79 (2.74) 3.13 (2.28) 2.84 (1.97) 2.42 (2.55) 1.59 (2.85) 2.38 (2.25) 1.54 (2.71) 2.64 (2.67) 2.50 (2,10) 2.17 (2.80) 1.51 (2.86) 2.42 (2.68) 1.49 (3.11) 2.58 (3.06)
2 5

. 312-511

2.54 (2.82) 2.19 (3.08)

10

The analysis indicates no significant effect of school level on each of the six OCB dimensions [Fs(424)<1.74, n.s.], whereas the effect of OCB dimensions is significant for each of the four school levels [Fs>7.94, ps<.001]. Sixth-graders are more clearsighted of the Development dimension than the Sportsmanship, Loyalty and Civic Virtue dimensions (ps<.03). No other significant difference emerges. Seventh-graders and eighth-graders are more clearsighted of the Development, Altruism and Compliance dimensions than the Loyalty and Civic Virtue dimensions (ps<.008). No other significant difference emerges. Finally, ninth-graders are more clearsighted of the Development, Altruism, Sportsmanship and Compliance dimensions than the Loyalty dimension (ps<.05). No other significant difference emerges. There were no other significant interactions.

DISCUSSION
The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis of clearsightedness of the social valuation of OCB declaration in an evaluative educational context such as a secondary school. The results support this hypothesis. Pupils reported more OCBs in order to benefit from a favorable evaluation rather than an unfavorable one (hypothesis 1). This OCB clearsightedness is greater overall for the following dimensions: Individual Development; Altruism; and Organizational Compliance. As expected, this clearsightedness seems to be more attuned to the institutional evaluators, as in the teachers, compared to the non-institutional evaluators, as in the parents and friends (hypothesis 2). Considering the various dimensions, OCB clearsightedness of the Sportsmanship, Civic Virtue and Loyalty dimensions is the most sensitive to referent type. For example, it is higher when pupils were instructed to answer as if presenting themselves to teachers and parents rather than to peers. We hypothesized that reported OCBs would increase with school level, which would have indicated a social learning of "good manners" (hypothesis 3). Nevertheless the results indicate that reporting OC'Bs (standard instniction) signiticantly decreases from the eighth-grade to ninth-grade. In the absence of any data concerning OCBs in classes preceding and succeeding secondary school, it is difficult to explain this change in terms of learning social standards. A possible explanation is a previously noted association between the decline of reported OCBs and an increase in incivility (or discourteous) behaviors between 12 and 16 years-old (Dupquier, 1999). With regards w the final hypothesis, girls spontaneously declare more OCBs than boys (hypothesis 4), notahly on die Organizational Compliance dimension. This could provoke premature conformity in ternis of role expectations as shown in some recent work (Farell & Finkelstein, 2007). However, clearsightedness for the social valuation of OCBs is not more marked among girls as compared to boys. To summarize, if OCBs are reported particularly by girls (and in particular in early secondary school classes i.e., sixth and seventh-grade), clearsightedness of the social valuation of OCBs depends on the evaluative context in which it occurs, independently of gender and school level. In the present context, the relationship with the evaluating authority (i.e., teachers) takes priority. This prompts a consideration of the place and mie of OCBs in teachers' judgments.

STUDY 2 OVERVIEW , AIMS AND HYPOTHESES

A second study was conducted in order to explore the effect of pupils' reported frequency of OCBs on teachers' judgments. Dubois and Le Poultier's (1991) protocol was followed. In addition, some modifications were made as a result of recent observations in die sociocognitive approach to judgment norms (Dubois, 2003). According to the aforementioned protocol, teachers had to read a file concerning a pupil. This file contained prepared information about the pupil's average grade. It also contained an OCB questionnaire completed to give the appearance of pupils reporting varying frequencies of OCBs (i.e., low versus high). The teachers had to evaluate whether the pupil would move ente the next year, as Dubois and Le Poultier (1991) similarly requested from their participants. They aise had to judge the pupil on items referring to two aspects of social value identified by Beauvois (1994, 1995; Cambon 2006; Dubois & Beauvois, 2005), namely social utility and social desirability. Firstly, they had to predict the pupil's academic success 11

(social utility) and success in social relationships (social desirability), in much the saine way that Mestre and Jouffre (2006) did. Secondly, they had to assess whether socially useful traits and socially desirable traits were applicable to the pupil, similar to the recruitment simulation used by Jouffre et al. (2008). In a professional setting, a supervisor's judgment, essentially a subjective and overall one, relies on two things. On the one hand it relies on the OCBs reported by the employee or observed by the superviser, On the other hand it relies on task performance, either objectively assessed (e.g., output) or subjectively assessed (e.g., by a superviser) (Podzakoff et al 2000). Because of this the first expectation is that teachers are going to be more favorable regarding the evaluation of the pupil's move (te the following year) but specifically when the pupil reports a higher frequency of OCBs (hypothesis 1). This is in addition to controlling for the pupil's objective performance (average grade). Secondly, there should be more of an effect of the declared frequency of OCBs on social utility judgments than on social desirability judgments (hypothesis 2). The pupil with a high frequency of OCBs, compared te the Slow frequency' pupil, should receive a better prognosis for academic success and should be described using more socially useful traits. Moreover, the 'higher frequency' pupil should receive a better prognosis of academic success than success in social relationships. Additionally they should be described using more socially useful traits as opposed te socially desirable traits.

METHOD
PARTICIPANTS
The participants were forty-six teachers (21 men, 24 women and 1 missing data) from four secondary schools with contrasting socio-economic status (2 located in Priority Education Areas and 2 net) and specializing in various subjects (Mathematics: N=7; French: N=9; Sport: N=4; Drawing: N=3; Foreign language: N=5; Music: N=3; Science: N=4; History and Geography: N=4; Missing data: N=3). The average number of years teaching was 16.36 years (SD=9.25; missing data on two participants).

MATERIAL
The material consisted of one file containing information about the pupil's (fourth-grader) average grade, an OCB questionnaire (completed by a 'pretend' pupil), and judgment questions. Instructions Iisted on the first page asked teachers to "Read information about a pupil before answering some questions. We ask you to turn to the following page after you've learnt about this first page. Of course, we know that this information alone is insufficient to make a judgment about a student. But the most important thing is your "first impressionsregardless of whether it is either a good or bad response." The pupil's average grade was the saine whatever the condition. Specifically, teachers were told that "this fourth-grader's average grade is equal to 9.65/20", corresponding to a medium-low achievement level. The OCB questionnaire was identical to the one used in the previous study. Two pupils were presented, one with a high frequency of OCBs and the other a low frequency. In the first case, for each of the items, the closest answer to the mean observed in the previous study (following pronormative instruction) was chosen. In the latter case, the items were chosen in exactly the saine way except it was in the condition with the counternormative instruction. The teachers had to answer to four items. They had to: (1) evaluate whether the pupil was eligible to progress to the following year (1: Unfavorable to 9: Favorable); (2) evaluate the general prognosis of pupil's academic success (1: Negative to 9: Positive); (3) evaluate the general prognosis of pupil's success in interpersonal relationships (1: Negative to 9: Positive); and (4) assess whether eight traits from Gallay's inventory (1992; see Dubois & Beauvois, 2005) applied to each of their pupils. These evaluations were measured on a five-point Likert scale (1=not at all to 5=tolally). Among these traits, four referred to social utility (Active, Dynamic, Intelligent, and Hardworking), and four to social desirability (Agreeable, Honest, Sincere, and Sympathetic).

PROCEDURE
The experimenter went to the different secondary schools and presented the study as university research dealing with judgment. When distributing the file, the experimenter added that responses were anonymous and confidential. The teachers gave back the file directly to the experimenter. 12

VARIABLES
A first, between-subjects independent variable was the pupil's OCB frequency with two modalities: high versus low. A second, within-subjects independent variable was the type of prognosis asked for from the teachers (two modalities): academic success versus success in the interpersonal relationships. A third, within-subjects independent variable was the type of traits attributed to the pupils (two modalities): socially useful traits versus socially desirable traits. Three dependent variables were considered: evaluation of whether the pupil was eligible to progress to the following year, evaluation of the general prognosis of pupil's success, and attribution of traits (to the pupil).

RESULTS
Firstly, conceming the progression to the following year, teachers were more favorable when the pupil had a high frequency of OCBs (M=6.16, SD=1.89) rather than a low frequency [M=4.95, SD=1.81, t(42)=-2.15, p<.04, 2=10]. Secondly, a 2(pupil's frequency of OCBs) * 2(prognosis type) analysis of variance was conducted on the mean evaluation of success prognosis. The effect of the OCB frequency is significant (F(1,44)=57.72, p<.001, 2=.57). Teachers gave a better prognosis of success when there was a high frequency of OCBs (M=6.83, SD=1.64) rather than a low frequency (M=3.68, SD=0.91). The effect of prognosis type is also significant [F(1,44)=9.35, p<.004, 2=.18]. Teachers' prognosis is more positive when it concerned success in social relationships (M=5.53, SD=2.65) than academie success (M=4.98, SD=1.75). The interaction between the two variables was significant [F(1,44)=37.26, p<.001, 2=.46], as can be seen in Figure 1.
9

T e a ch e r's p ro g n o sis o f su cce ss

Typ e o f p ro g no sis
1

Low

Hig h

A ca d e m ic S o cia l re la tio nship s

P up il's d e cla re d fre q ue ncy o f O C B

Figure 1. Teachers mean prognosis of success by type of prognosis and pupils declared frequency of OCBs

13

The analysis indicates that teachers gave a better prognosis when there was a high frequency of OCBs rather than a low frequency and did so in relation to academic success (M High OCBs = 6.00, SD = 1.72; Mlow OCBs = 3.95, SD = 0.94; p < .002) and success in social relationships (MHigh OCBs = 7.65, SD = 1.83; Mlow OCBs = 3.40, SD = 1.23; p < .001). Nevertheless, when the pupil had a high frequency of OCBs, the teachers prognosis was better in relation to social success than to academic success (p < .001), whereas the reverse could be observed when the pupil had a low frequency of OCBs (p < .05). Finally, a 2(pupils frequency of OCBs) * 2(type of traits) analysis of variance was conducted on the mean attribution score of traits. Two indices were calculated. The first one refers to the mean attribution score of the socially useful traits ( = 0.87, rinter-item = .67, N = 43, p < .001), and the second one to the mean attribution score of the socially desirable traits ( = 0.70, rinter-item = .43, N = 43, p < .005). The effect of OCB frequency is significant (F(1, 43) = 29.19, p < .001, = .40). Teachers attributed the traits more to the pupil with a high frequency of OCBs (M = 2.78, SD = 0.64) than a low frequency (M = 1.93, SD = 0.32). The effect of the type of traits is also significant (F(1, 43) = 200.42, p < .001, = .82). Teachers attributed the socially useful traits more (M = 3.01, SD = 1.01) than the socially desirable traits (M = 1.69, SD = 0.40). The interaction between the two variables is significant (F(1, 43) = 22.95, p < .001, = .35) as can be seen in Figure 2.
5

T e a ch e rs a ttrib u tio n o f tra its

Typ e o f tra its

1

Low

Hig h

S o cia lly use ful S o cia lly d e sira b le

P up il's d e cla re d fre q ue ncy o f O C B

Figure 2. Teachers attribution mean score of traits by type of traits and pupils declared frequency of OCBs The analysis indicates that teachers attributed the socially useful traits more than the socially desirable traits. This occurred regardless of frequency, i.e., with a high frequency of OCBs (MUseful = 3.66, SD = 0.97; MDesirable = 1.89, SD = 0.40; p < .001) and a low frequency (MUseful = 2.36, SD = 0.46; MDesirable = 1.49, SD = 0.29; p < .001). Nevertheless, teachers attributed the socially useful traits more to the pupil with a high frequency of OCBs than a low frequency (p < .001), whereas there was no significant difference between the two pupils on the attribution of socially desirable traits.

14

DISCUSSION
In this second study, the aim was to study the impact of the pupils frequency of OCBs on teachers judgments. This was accomplished using measures from the framework (from a sociocognitive perspective) used to examine the impact of causal explanations on social judgment (Dubois, 2003). Teachers had to: evaluate whether a pupil was eligible to progress to the following year (see Dubois & Poultier, 1991); provide a prognosis of academic success and success in social relationships (see Mestre & Jouffre, 2006); and to attribute traits that refer to the useful versus desirable aspects of social value (see Jouffre et al., 2007). These tasks were conducted on one of two types of pupil: one who had a high frequency of OCBs and another with a low frequency. The observed results overall confirm our hypotheses and indicate a more favorable judgment towards the pupil with a high frequency of OCBs rather than a low frequency (hypothesis 1). Indeed, this pupil firstly received a more favorable opinion about their eligibility to progress, and secondly, a better prognosis about academic success and success in social relationships. Generally he was described as more socially useful (active, dynamic, intelligent and hard-working) and desirable (pleasant, honest, sincere and likeable) than the pupil with a low frequency of OCBs (hypothesis 2). These results indicate that the expression of OCBs is associated with social utility because the pupils with a high frequency of OCBs are judged better institutionally (progression into higher years, academic achievement, useful characteristics) than the pupils with a low frequency of OCBs. However, the pupil with a high frequency of OCBs is judged by the teachers as being able to have better social achievements than academic whilst he also receives more useful, rather than desirable, characteristics. We also note that with regards to the desirable aspect of the social value, the results on both measures are not similar, although they are also not contradictory. The pupil with a high frequency of OCBs received a better prognosis on success in social relationships than the pupil with a low frequency, while both are described using the mean of the socially desirable traits. It is possible that these differences depend on the implicit theories connected to the context in which these measures were realized. Indeed, in the school context, teachers do not hesitate to attribute relevant traits in line with an educational plan, namely socially useful traits (active, dynamic, intelligent and hard-working). On the other hand, although they distinguish between both pupils in terms of success in social relationships, they do not provide evidence for a distinction in terms of personal characterization (i.e., using traits with less relevance in an educational context, namely the socially desirable traits such as pleasant, honest, sincere and likeable).

GENERAL DISCUSSION
Two studies were conducted to examine the social valorization of OCBs in a school context. From this perspective, a questionnaire of OCBs adapted to a population of secondary school pupils was developed. It consisted of 12 items referring to the principal dimensions of OCBs identified in the literature, namely Altruism, Sportsmanship, Organizational Loyalty, Organizational Compliance, Civic Virtue and Self Development. This questionnaire was administered, in the first study, to secondary school pupils who had to answer it according to the three instructions from the self-presentation paradigm. The two normative instructions made reference to teachers, parents or peers in order to investigate the hypothesis of an institutional aspect to the social valuation clearsightedness of OCBs. This questionnaire, administered in a pronormative way by presenting a target-pupil with a high frequency of OCBs on the one hand, and in a counternormative way with a low frequency target-pupil on the other, was presented, in a second study, to teachers who were instructed to complete several tasks. The tasks were to: evaluate whether a pupil was eligible to progress to the following year; provide a prognosis of academic success and success in social relationships; and to attribute four socially useful traits and four socially desirable traits. Overall, the results obtained with the self-presentation paradigm (study 1) and the judge paradigm (study 2) turned out to be convergent. This is similar to many results observed within the framework of the sociocognitive approach of internality (Dubois, 2003). The declaration of OCBs is an object of social valuation of which pupils are knowledgeable. Indeed, the knowledge, or clearsightedness (Py & Somat, on 1991), of this social valuation is particularly expressed with regards to institutional authority, as in the teachers, much as Dubois et al. (2003) found concerning internality. The declaration of OCBs by pupils is taken into account as part of the teachers judgment, in much the same way as OCBs declared by employees, or observed by managers, in a professional context influence a managers judgment (Organ et 15

al., 2006; Podzakoff et al., 2000). However, this influence seems to be particularly significant for measures covering an institutional judgment or dealing with social utility (Beauvois, 1994, 1995) like eligibility to progress, forecast of academic achievement, attribution of useful characteristics. This is opposed to measures covering an interpersonal judgment or looking at social desirability (Beauvois,1994, 1995) like forecast of success in social relationships, attribution of desirable traits etc. These latter results are particularly similar to those found within the framework of the norm of internality (for review see Gilibert & Cambon, 2003). Thus, these observations constitute a first element in favor of a normative concept of the declaration of OCBs in a school context. Pupils believe they must express OCBs moreso within the framework of institutional relationships and so OCBs become an integral part of the institutional evaluators judgment. From this perspective, and according to research related to the effect of pupils internality on teachers judgments, these results support the hypothesis that OCBs perform a social and institutional function within an educational (school) environment. Indeed, their recognition, as in being declared by the pupils, not only contributes to good educational functioning, but also teachers react to them in different respects (more mutual aid, civilities, compliance, individual initiatives). This subsequently strengthens, positively, the educational capacity and judgment of these latter ones, so maintaining the forms of power established in a school context. This point of view is in accordance with Podsakoff et al. (2000) who emphasize that managers overestimate the weight of OCB dimensions which has an impact on their self-evaluation (i.e., of their own managerial performance). This suggests that future investigation should clarify the contribution of OCBs on the one hand (for example, in the actual improvement of the schools functioning) and on the other hand, in the consolidated concern of teaching judgment. Later studies will also have to clarify the respective contribution of each of the OCB dimensions, notably the likely conformity in expectations of kind on girls behalf???. More generally, future research should examine the legitimacy of the current measures, established in French schools, which ultimately aim to improve living conditions and contribute to the development of citizenship. What will be the effect of an educational principle explicitly integrating such relative acquisitions into a school evaluation plan? Must civility and citizenship be conceived as the consequence of an adequate education, in the same way as politeness? Or can they be imposed, obtained by submission and obedience, at the risk of constituting a new relative constraint inciting pupils to commit infringement? By examining the nature and conditions of valuation of citizenship behaviors in this organization (i.e., school), we are inclined to think that OCBs offer young people a freedom of action and expression in an evaluation process, a process in which they are predominantly passive targets. Indeed, when it is left to the pupils initiative, and when they are clearsighted enough (as in the evaluation issue) we notice that this behavior is the focus of a real strategy of self-valuation. To register the OCBs in the common base of the expected skills means transforming these strategies into capacities to acquire. So it confers them the same status as the other academic knowledge, without taking into account their possible normative constituent. We know that a pupils social origin, gender, overall class level, instances of repression and their capacity to summon up internal explanations, are some of the factors which can affect the teachers evaluation of this pupil (Bressoux & Pansu, 2003). It is possible that from then on OCBs also participate, in an implicit way, in the building of the schools judgment. By school judgment, we mean the overall evaluation which a teacher expresses towards a pupil and which is based chiefly on objective data (e.g., notes, school behaviors) than on meta-informative elements such as the pupils characteristics as well as behavior and the answering speech in teachers normative expectations. From this perspective and regarding the school citizenship evaluation, we can think of a possible confound as a result of the halo effect which could occur by evaluating pupils on the basis of their academic outcomes (whether good or bad). This effect would add to any already existing risks of discrimination which confront certain pupils. In spite of the important contributions of both studies in understanding the social determiners of declaring OCBs and the impact of this declaration on teachers judgments clarification is needed. There must be clarification of: 1) the adaptability of the OCB concept; 2) the relevant dimensions of OCBs in the school domain; and 3) the effect of every dimension on teachers judgments of their own pupils. First, as far as the abstract is concerned, it is not certain that the OCB concept can be adapted from a working organization context where it was developed to that of the school organization. Several arguments can be put forward which depend, among others things, on the protagonists status in 16

each context. Employees do not have the same motivations as the pupils. In addition the issues are not comparable. Where employees will look for intrinsic satisfaction in a task which they have, ideally, chosen, and will find extrinsic profit through preserving their level of living, the young school child can often fall no farther than obtaining a certificate, the choice of an orientation, and, for some, the progression to the next class. If the commonality between employees and pupils lies in the position of being evaluated by a legitimate institutional authority, it is not certain, from their perspectives, that the consequence of these evaluations is comparable. These observations guided us to pursue our research along the theme of updating the OCBs without losing sight of the analysis of the contexts in which this concept was originally developed. From this point on, there are some methodological obstacles. Currently, the tools of OCB measurement are still open to debate, notably with regards to the structure identified by the various dimensions of scales most traditionally used (LePine et al, 2002; Hoffman et al ., 2007). However that may be, the debate remains firmly in the field of OCBs in working organizations. To question the operationalization of OCBs in school organizations supposes on the one hand, the more precise analysis of the relevance of the various OCBs dimensions in a school context and on the other hand, to focus ones attention on the underlying psychological processes in this specific context. For that purpose, we shall have to finish this first theme of research with more encompassing investigations, in elementary schools but also in secondary schools. It is in this context where its possible, among others factors, there is an impact of the desired orientation (after school leaving certificate) and, more generally, an impact of the intrinsic motivation in studies on strategies of social valuation of OCBs with decision-making authorities. This further research will also allow us to examine possible normative constituents of OCBs by clarifying the acquisition of such normative strategies. For that purpose, we must explicitly place teachers in a position to judge real pupils behaviors - and not only declared behaviors - and to systematically analyze the explanatory part of these OCBs observed in the construction of a teaching judgment.

REFERENCES
Allen, T. D. (2006). Rewarding Good Citizens: The Relation ship Between Citizenship Behavior, Gender, and organizational rewards. Journal of Applied Psychology, 36, 120-143. Bateman, T., & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between affect and employee citizenship. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 587-595. Beauvois, J.L. (1994). Trait de la servitude librale. Paris : Dunod. Beauvois, J.L. (1995). La connaissance des utilits sociales. Psychologie Franaise, 40, 375-387. Beauvois, J. L., & Dubois, N. (1988). The norm of internality in the explanation of psychological events. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 299-316. Beauvois, J.L., Bourjade, A., & Pansu, P. (1991). Norme dinternalit et valuation professionnelle. RIPS International Review of Social Psychology, 4, 9-28. Beauvois, J.L., & Le Poultier, F. (1986). Norme d'internalit et pouvoir social en psychologie quotidienne. Psychologie Franaise, 31, 100-107. Bressoux, P., & Pansu, P. (2003). Quand les enseignants jugent leurs lves. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France. Cambon, L. (2006). Dsirabilit sociale et utilit sociale, deux dimensions de la valeur communique par les adjectifs de personnalit. RIPS International Review of Social Psychology, 19, 125-151. Cotton, J. L., Vollrath, D. A., Froggatt, K.L., Lenggnick-Hall, M.L., & Jennings, D. (1988). Employee participation: Diverse forms and different outcomes. Academy of Management Review, 13, 1, 8-22. Dagot, L., & Vonthron, A.M. (2001) Comportements de citoyennet organisationnelle et anticipation de la performance professionnelle. Une approche exprimentale. Psychologie du travail et des organisations, 9, 69-88. Defrance, B. (2000). La violence lcole. Paris : Syros. Dompnier, B., Pansu, P., and Bressoux, P. (in press). An integrative model of scholastic judgments: Pupils characteristics, class context, halo effect and internal attributions. European Journal of Psychology of Education. Dubois, N. (1988). The norm of internality: Social valorisation of behavior and renforcements in young people. Journal of Social Psychology, 128, 431-439. Dubois, N. (1994). La norme dinternalit et le libralisme. Grenoble : Presses Universitaires de Grenoble. Dubois, N. (Ed.) (2003). A sociocognitive approach to social norms. London: Routledge. Dubois, N., & Beauvois, J.L. (2005). Normativeness and individualism. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 123-146. Dubois, N., & Le Poultier, F. (1991). Internalit et valuation scolaire. In J.L. Beauvois, R.V. Joule & J.M. Monteil (Eds.), Perspectives cognitives et conduites sociales. 3. Quelles cognitions ? Quelles conduites ? (pp. 153-166). Cousset : DelVal. Dubois, N., Loose, F., Matteuci, M.C., & Selleri, P. (2003). Sociocognitive development. In N. Dubois (Ed.), A sociocognitive approach to social norms (pp. 94-122). London: Routledge. Dupquier, J. (1999). La violence en milieu scolaire. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

17

Dubois, N., Loose, F., Matteuci, M.C., & Selleri, P. (2003). Sociocognitive development. In N. Dubois (Ed.), A sociocognitive approach to social norms (pp. 94-122). London: Routledge. Ehrhart, M. G., & Naumann, S.E. (2004). Organizational Citizenship Behavior in work groups: A group norms approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 960-974. Farell, S. K., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2007). Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Gender: Expectation and Attribution for Performance. North American Journal of Psychology, 9, 1, 81-96. Flament, C., Jouffre, S., & Py, J. (1998). Aspects mthodologiques et thoriques de ltude des normes sociales. 2me Congrs International de Psychologie Sociale en Langue Franaise, Turin. Gallay, M. (1994). Evaluation personnologique : Affect versus utilit sociale. Manuscript non publi, Universit Pierre Mends France, Grenoble. Gilibert, D., & Cambon, L. (2003). Paradigms of the sociocognitive approach. In N. Dubois (Ed.), A sociocognitive approach to social norms (pp. 38-69). London: Routledge. Hoffman, B. J., Blair, C., Meriac, J. P., & Woehr, D. J. (2007). Expanding the Criterion Domain? A quantitative Review of the OCB Literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 555-566. Hui, C., Lam, S. K., & Law, K. K., (2000). Instrumental value of Organizational Citizenship Behavior for promotion: a field quasiexperiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 822-828. Jouffre, S., Somat, A., & Test, B. (sous presse). Normes Sociales, jugement valuatif et valeurs dutilit sociale versus de dsirabilit sociale. Psychologie et Socit. LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2002). The Nature of Organizational Citizenship Behavior: A Critical Review and MetaAnalysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1, 52-65. Lovell, S. E., Kahn, A. S., Anton, J., Davidson, A., Dowling, E., Post, D., & Mason, C. (1999). Does gender affect the link between organizational citizenship behaviour and performance evaluation? Sex Roles, 41, 469-478. MacKenzie, S. B., Podzakoff, P.M., & Fetter, R. (1993). The impact of organizational citizenship behaviour on evaluations for sales performance. Journal of Marketing, 57, 70-80. Mestre, J., & Jouffre, S. (2006). Paradigme dautoprsentation, paradigme des juges et jugements dutilit sociale versus de dsirabilit sociale. Sixime Congrs International de Psychologie Sociale en Langue Franaise, organis par lA.D.R.I.P.S., Grenoble (France). Motowildo, S. J. (2000). Some basic issues related to contextual performance and Organizational citizenship behaviour in human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 10, 115-126. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: the good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its construct clean up time. Human performance, 10, 85-97. Organ, D. W. & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-663. Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Mackenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: its Nature, Antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pansu, P. (1997a). Norme dinternalit et apprciation de la valeur professionnelle : Leffet des explications internes dans lapprciation du personnel. Le Travail Humain, 60, 205-222. Pansu, P. (1997b). The norm of internality in an organizational context. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 6, 37-58. Pansu, P., & Gilibert, D. (2002). Effect of causal explanations on work-related judgments. Applied Psychology : An International Review, 51, 505-526. Pansu, P., Bressoux, P., & Louche, C. (2003). Theory of the social norm of internality applied to education and organizations. In N. Dubois (Ed.), A sociocognitive approach to social norms (pp. 196-230). London : Routledge. Podsakoff, P. M., Ahearne, M., & Mackenzie, S. B. (1997). Organizational Citizenship Behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 262-270. Podsakoff, P. M, & Mackenzie, S. B. (1994). Organizational Citizenship Behaviors and sales unit effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, 31, 351-363.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R, H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviours and their effects on followerstrust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviours. Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107-142. Podsakoff, P. M., Mac Kenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: a critical review of the theorical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, 3, 513-563. Py, J., & Somat, A. (1991). Normativit, conformit et clairvoyance : Leurs effets sur le jugement valuatif dans un contexte scolaire. In J.L. Beauvois, R.V. Joule & J.M. Monteil (Eds.) Perspectives cognitives et conduites sociales. 3. Quelles cognitions ? Quelles conduites ? (pp. 167-193). Cousset : DelVal. Py, J., & Somat, A. (1996). Internalit, clairvoyance normative et auto-prsentation : Quelques vrifications et prolongements. In J.L. Beauvois, R.V. Joule & J.M. Monteil (Eds.), Perspectives cognitives et conduites sociales. 4. Contextes et contextes sociaux (pp. 217-248). Neuchtel : Delachaux et Niestl. Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behaviour: its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 653-663.

18

Walz, S. M., & Niehoff, B. P. (1996). Organizational citizenship behaviours and their effect on organizational effectiveness in limited-menu restaurants. Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, 56th Annual Meeting, Cincinnati, OH, 307-311. Zellars, K. L., Tepper, B. J., & Duffy, M. K. (2002). Abusive supervision and subordinates Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1068-1076. Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviour. Journal of Management, 17, 501-617.

19