Mary C. Kern
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Mary C. Kern has a total of 19 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Dolly Chugh
Department of Management and Organizations, Stern School of Business, New York University
2 shared publications - Alexis Dibbs
Center for Advanced Technology and Communication in Health (CATCH), CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York; Public Health Informatics, Computational, and Operations Research (PHICOR), CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York; Artificial Intelligence, Modeling, and Informatics, for Nutrition Guidance and Systems (AIMINGS) Center, CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York
1 shared publication - Aneeta Rattan
London Business School
1 shared publication - Bruce Y. Lee
Center for Advanced Technology and Communication in Health (CATCH), CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York, NY, USA; Public Health Informatics, Computational, and Operations Research (PHICOR), CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York, NY, USA; Artificial Intelligence, Modeling, and Informatics for Nutrition Guidance and Systems (AIMINGS) Center, CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York, NY, USA
1 shared publication Cameron White
Center for Advanced Technology and Communication in Health (CATCH), CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York; Public Health Informatics, Computational, and Operations Research (PHICOR), CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York; Artificial Intelligence, Modeling, and Informatics, for Nutrition Guidance and Systems (AIMINGS) Center, CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York
1 shared publication- Colleen Weatherwax
Center for Advanced Technology and Communication in Health (CATCH), CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York; Public Health Informatics, Computational, and Operations Research (PHICOR), CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York; Artificial Intelligence, Modeling, and Informatics, for Nutrition Guidance and Systems (AIMINGS) Center, CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York City, New York
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Top Cited Papers
- 27 February 2025
- Published by Elsevier in American Journal of Preventive Medicine
- Vol. 68 (4) , 645-655
The Health and Economic Burden of Employee Burnout to U.S. Employers
- 27 February 2025
- Published by Elsevier in American Journal of Preventive Medicine
- Vol. 68 (4) , 645-655
Top Cited PapersThe Health and Economic Burden of Employee Burnout to U.S. Employers
- 31 July 2023
- Published by SAGE Publications in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Vol. 51 (3) , 409-422
A Growth Mindset Frame Increases Opting In to Reading Information About Bias
We explore the conditions under which people will opt in to reading information about bias and stereotypes, a key precursor to the types of self-directed learning that diversity and anti-bias advocates increasingly endorse. Across one meta-analysis (total N = 1,122; 7 studies, 5 pre-registered) and 2 pre-registered experiments (total N = 1,717), we identify a condition under which people opt in to reading more about implicit bias and stereotypes. People randomly assigned to read a growth, rather than fixed, mindset frame about bias opted in to read more information about stereotypes and implicit bias (Study 1 and Study 3). The mechanism that drove these effects was individuals’ construal of the task as a challenge (Studies 2 and 3). Our findings offer insight into how to promote engagement with information about stereotypes and biases. We discuss how this work advances the study of mindsets and diversity science.
- 31 July 2023
- Published by SAGE Publications in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Vol. 51 (3) , 409-422
A Growth Mindset Frame Increases Opting In to Reading Information About Bias
We explore the conditions under which people will opt in to reading information about bias and stereotypes, a key precursor to the types of self-directed learning that diversity and anti-bias advocates increasingly endorse. Across one meta-analysis (total N = 1,122; 7 studies, 5 pre-registered) and 2 pre-registered experiments (total N = 1,717), we identify a condition under which people opt in to reading more about implicit bias and stereotypes. People randomly assigned to read a growth, rather than fixed, mindset frame about bias opted in to read more information about stereotypes and implicit bias (Study 1 and Study 3). The mechanism that drove these effects was individuals’ construal of the task as a challenge (Studies 2 and 3). Our findings offer insight into how to promote engagement with information about stereotypes and biases. We discuss how this work advances the study of mindsets and diversity science.
- 8 July 2016
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 474-503
Ethical learning: releasing the moral unicorn
- 8 July 2016
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- p. 474-503
Ethical learning: releasing the moral unicorn
- 1 March 2009
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychological Science
- Vol. 20 (3) , 378-384
Bounded Ethicality
Ethical decision making is vulnerable to the forces of automaticity. People behave differently in the face of a potential loss versus a potential gain, even when the two situations are transparently identical. Across three experiments, decision makers engaged in more unethical behavior if a decision was presented in a loss frame than if the decision was presented in a gain frame. In Experiment 1 , participants in the loss-frame condition were more likely to favor gathering “insider information” than were participants in the gain-frame condition. In Experiment 2 , negotiators in the loss-frame condition lied more than negotiators in the gain-frame condition. In Experiment 3 , the tendency to be less ethical in the loss-frame condition occurred under time pressure and was eliminated through the removal of time pressure.
- 1 March 2009
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychological Science
- Vol. 20 (3) , 378-384
Bounded Ethicality
Ethical decision making is vulnerable to the forces of automaticity. People behave differently in the face of a potential loss versus a potential gain, even when the two situations are transparently identical. Across three experiments, decision makers engaged in more unethical behavior if a decision was presented in a loss frame than if the decision was presented in a gain frame. In Experiment 1 , participants in the loss-frame condition were more likely to favor gathering “insider information” than were participants in the gain-frame condition. In Experiment 2 , negotiators in the loss-frame condition lied more than negotiators in the gain-frame condition. In Experiment 3 , the tendency to be less ethical in the loss-frame condition occurred under time pressure and was eliminated through the removal of time pressure.