Effect size information is essential for the scientific enterprise and plays an increasingly central role in the scientific process. We extracted 147,328 correlations and developed a hierarchical taxonomy of variables reported in Journal of Applied Psychology and Personnel Psychology from 1980 to 2010 to produce empirical effect size benchmarks at the omnibus level, for 20 common research domains, and for an even finer grained level of generality. Results indicate that the usual interpretation and classification of effect sizes as small, medium, and large bear almost no resemblance to findings in the field, because distributions of effect sizes exhibit tertile partitions at values approximately one-half to one-third those intuited by Cohen (1988). Our results offer information that can be used for research planning and design purposes, such as producing better informed non-nil hypotheses and estimating statistical power and planning sample size accordingly. We also offer information useful for understanding the relative importance of the effect sizes found in a particular study in relationship to others and which research domains have advanced more or less, given that larger effect sizes indicate a better understanding of a phenomenon. Also, our study offers information about research domains for which the investigation of moderating effects may be more fruitful and provide information that is likely to facilitate the implementation of Bayesian analysis. Finally, our study offers information that practitioners can use to evaluate the relative effectiveness of various types of interventions.
The validity-adverse impact tradeoff associated with the relationships among general mental ability (GMA), ethnicity, and employee performance represents one of the most pressing concerns in organizational staffing. We conducted 4 studies with 273 bank employees and 197 university students designed to assess the extent to which executive attention (EA) and GMA predict simulation performance and supervisory ratings of performance. We also assess the extent to which measures of EA and GMA are associated with subgroup differences. Results indicate that, like GMA, EA positively predicts managerial simulation and supervisory ratings of performance. In addition, although reaching statistical significance in only 1 of our 4 studies, EA was generally associated with smaller subgroup differences than GMA, and meta-analysis across our samples supports this reduced subgroup difference. Moreover, advantages of EA tend to increase as studies move from the laboratory with undergraduate students to a concurrent validation organizational setting with employees. We discuss implications for a theory-based view of cognitive ability in employee selection and implications for managerial practice.General mental ability (GMA) has long occupied a central role in the prediction of employee performance. Researchers argue that it is essential for organizational performance, public safety, and even international competitiveness that organizations select employees on the basis of GMA because of high criterion-related validities with employee performance, and that there "cannot be a debate" on this issue (Schmidt, 2002, p.
BackgroundAspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD), also known as Samter’s triad, is a clinical syndrome which consists of aspirin (ASA) intolerance, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, and intrinsic bronchial asthma (Press Med 119:48-51, 1922). ASA challenge is the gold standard for diagnosing AERD (Curr Allergy Asthma 9:155-163, 2009). The practice of ASA challenge and desensitization in Canada is infrequently utilized, which may explain its omission as a viable therapeutic option in the latest Canadian clinical practice guidelines for acute and chronic rhinosinusitis (AACI 7:1-38, 2011).MethodsThis retrospective study assessed 111 patients who underwent ASA desensitization in the Allergy and Immunology clinic at St. Joseph’s Healthcare (SJHC) in London, Ontario. The mean age was 50.7 years, and 52.5% (n = 58) were male. Sixty-one percent (n = 68) claimed prior, significant reactions to ASA, and all patients had features of AERD.ResultsSeventy-three percent (n = 81) claimed symptom improvement after achieving maintenance dosing on the desensitization protocol. Of this population, 21.6% (n = 24) improved in all 3 areas of interest (sense of taste or smell, upper respiratory symptoms and lower respiratory symptoms). Twenty-six percent (n = 29) had adverse effects, mostly in the way of gastrointestinal upset, but no severe adverse events were seen.ConclusionsASA desensitization helps improve symptoms in patients with AERD. Further, it allows patients to tolerate additional ASA and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) when needed for supplemental analgesia or for cardio-protection. This is of particular benefit in those who require these medications for improved quality of life, and for reduced morbidity and mortality, such as those with cardiovascular disease or chronic pain. There should be further studies conducted in Canada as well as consideration for ASA desensitization to be included in the next clinical practice guidelines.
Family firm institutional context is composed of institutions that originate from the family and the business. Hence, a confluence of family and business institutions, with varying degrees of salience, interact and influence entrepreneurial behaviors within family firms. We suggest an institution-based perspective for examining entrepreneurial behaviors and explain why an institutional perspective can deepen our understanding of the micro-foundations of corporate entrepreneurship within family firms. Furthermore, we elaborate on family institutions’ influence on entrepreneurial behaviors by highlighting these institutions’ impact on family members’ cognitions and abilities, as well as, family and nonfamily members’ interactions and relationships.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.