University of Illinois at Chicago

Academic Instructor/Teaching Assistant

Teaching Assistant (2009-2013):
• Assisted faculty in general maintenance of psychology classes from 150 to 300 students
• Served as head Teaching Assistant for four semesters, which included supervising one to five graduate teaching assistants
• Managed course website
• Organized and led group discussions
• Prepared and delivered lectures to groups of twenty
• Graded papers and exams
• Created exam material
• Acted as liaison between student and instructor

Academic Instructor (2014):
• Designed and taught personality psychology course for Spring and Summer semesters
• Created course materials from scratch including PowerPoint presentations, classroom activities, papers, and exams
• Assisted students in understanding and interpreting current research findings
• Delivered lectures to groups of fifty
• Developed critical thinking exercises

Maryville University of Saint Louis

Adjunct Psychology Instructor

Taught a variety of undergraduate psychology classes, specializing in personality, social, and critical thinking. Creatively generated PowerPoint presentations, original class material, interactive activities, and alternative methods of educational assessment. Provided mentoring services to students.

Kumon North America, Inc.

Assistant Director

Nicole worked at Kumon North America, Inc. as a Assistant Director

Stanford University Graduate School of Business

Research Assistant

• Conducted laboratory experiments and field surveys
• Developed coding schemes for large data files
• Programmed online studies using html language
• Analyzed large data files using SPSS statistical software
• Presented research ideas in lab meetings
• Managed data file for pool of 2,000 participants using formulas and macros in excel
• Collaborated with faculty and graduate students on multiple projects
• Published article in academic journal
• Attended national psychology conferences

North Central College

Adjunct Psychology Instructor

• Designed and taught introductory and personality psychology courses
• Created course materials from scratch including PowerPoint presentations, classroom activities, papers, and exams
• Facilitated group discussion, encouraging students to examine current research issues in psychology from multiple angles
• Delivered lectures to groups of thirty to thirty-five
• Evaluated student performance and provided feedback throughout the term
• Conducted item and performance analysis on exams using excel and SPSS
• Graded papers and exams

A Just Harvest

In the kitchen, I worked all positions including line, server, busser, dishwasher. I assisted in overall management, greeted patrons, and helped to create a friendly and egalitarian environment

In the office, I answered phones, filed paperwork,conducted data entry,
maintained general organization of the office, maintained and updated client database, and assisted in charity and fund-raising events

Power and overconfident decision-making.

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Five experiments demonstrate that experiencing power leads to overconfident decision-making. Using multiple instantiations of power, including an episodic recall task (Experiments 1–3), a measure of work-related power (Experiment 4), and assignment to high- and low-power roles (Experiment 5), power produced overconfident decisions that generated monetary losses for the powerful. The current findings, through both mediation and moderation, also highlight the central role that the sense of power plays in producing these decision-making tendencies. First, sense of power, but not mood, mediated the link between power and overconfidence (Experiment 3). Second, the link between power and overconfidence was severed when access to power was not salient to the powerful (Experiment 4) and when the powerful were made to feel personally incompetent in their domain of power (Experiment 5). These findings indicate that only when objective power leads people to feel subjectively powerful does it produce overconfident decision-making.

Power and overconfident decision-making.

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Five experiments demonstrate that experiencing power leads to overconfident decision-making. Using multiple instantiations of power, including an episodic recall task (Experiments 1–3), a measure of work-related power (Experiment 4), and assignment to high- and low-power roles (Experiment 5), power produced overconfident decisions that generated monetary losses for the powerful. The current findings, through both mediation and moderation, also highlight the central role that the sense of power plays in producing these decision-making tendencies. First, sense of power, but not mood, mediated the link between power and overconfidence (Experiment 3). Second, the link between power and overconfidence was severed when access to power was not salient to the powerful (Experiment 4) and when the powerful were made to feel personally incompetent in their domain of power (Experiment 5). These findings indicate that only when objective power leads people to feel subjectively powerful does it produce overconfident decision-making.

Personality systems and the coherence of social behavior

In B. Gawronski & G. Bodenhausen (Eds.), Theory and explanation in social psychology

Power and overconfident decision-making.

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Five experiments demonstrate that experiencing power leads to overconfident decision-making. Using multiple instantiations of power, including an episodic recall task (Experiments 1–3), a measure of work-related power (Experiment 4), and assignment to high- and low-power roles (Experiment 5), power produced overconfident decisions that generated monetary losses for the powerful. The current findings, through both mediation and moderation, also highlight the central role that the sense of power plays in producing these decision-making tendencies. First, sense of power, but not mood, mediated the link between power and overconfidence (Experiment 3). Second, the link between power and overconfidence was severed when access to power was not salient to the powerful (Experiment 4) and when the powerful were made to feel personally incompetent in their domain of power (Experiment 5). These findings indicate that only when objective power leads people to feel subjectively powerful does it produce overconfident decision-making.

Personality systems and the coherence of social behavior

In B. Gawronski & G. Bodenhausen (Eds.), Theory and explanation in social psychology

“Think” versus “feel” framing effects in persuasion

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

This research tests the hypothesis that attitudes and people with cognitive or affective orientations are differentially susceptible to persuasive messages framed as reflecting the message source’s thoughts or feelings, even when there are no substantive differences in the messages themselves. In three studies, the exact same arguments were more persuasive when their framing (e.g., “I think…” vs. “I feel…”) matched rather than mismatched the cognitive/affective orientation of the target attitude or message recipient. Moreover, this effect was mediated by processing fluency. Message recipients found it easier to process matched compared to mismatched messages, and this fluency increased persuasion.

Power and overconfident decision-making.

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Five experiments demonstrate that experiencing power leads to overconfident decision-making. Using multiple instantiations of power, including an episodic recall task (Experiments 1–3), a measure of work-related power (Experiment 4), and assignment to high- and low-power roles (Experiment 5), power produced overconfident decisions that generated monetary losses for the powerful. The current findings, through both mediation and moderation, also highlight the central role that the sense of power plays in producing these decision-making tendencies. First, sense of power, but not mood, mediated the link between power and overconfidence (Experiment 3). Second, the link between power and overconfidence was severed when access to power was not salient to the powerful (Experiment 4) and when the powerful were made to feel personally incompetent in their domain of power (Experiment 5). These findings indicate that only when objective power leads people to feel subjectively powerful does it produce overconfident decision-making.

Personality systems and the coherence of social behavior

In B. Gawronski & G. Bodenhausen (Eds.), Theory and explanation in social psychology

“Think” versus “feel” framing effects in persuasion

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

This research tests the hypothesis that attitudes and people with cognitive or affective orientations are differentially susceptible to persuasive messages framed as reflecting the message source’s thoughts or feelings, even when there are no substantive differences in the messages themselves. In three studies, the exact same arguments were more persuasive when their framing (e.g., “I think…” vs. “I feel…”) matched rather than mismatched the cognitive/affective orientation of the target attitude or message recipient. Moreover, this effect was mediated by processing fluency. Message recipients found it easier to process matched compared to mismatched messages, and this fluency increased persuasion.