Forty Questions About Validity Generalization and Meta‐analysis

Schmidt, Frank L.; Hunter, John E.; Pearlman, Kenneth; Hirsh, Hannah Rothstein; Sackett, Paul R.; Schmitt, Neal; Tenopyr, Mary L.; Kehoe, Jerard F.; Zedeck, Sheldon

doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1985.tb00565.x

Cited by 212 publications

(165 citation statements)

References 85 publications

(128 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

159

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This does not run counter to the conclusions reached in the validity generalization literature devoted to cognitive ability tests (Hunter, 1986;Schmidt & Hunter, 1981;Schmidt, Pearlman, Hunter, & Hirsh, 1985). In this literature, situational specificity is addressed at the level of the organization, job, time period, or other factors associated with the immediate work environment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 42%

Cognitive ability and career attainment: Moderating effects of early career success.

Dreher

Bretz²

1991

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three explanations regarding the prediction that early career success will moderate the relationship between cognitive ability and career attainment are presented along with an empirical examination of this issue. Using longitudinal data provided for 156 managerial, professional, and technical employees, significant moderating effects for an age-graded index of early career success were observed. The relationships between two measures of cognitive ability and later career job level were stronger for individuals identified as below average with respect to early career success than for their above average counterparts. These results agree with the proposition that the acquisition of knowledge, skills, and information is particularly dependent upon cognitive ability for inhviduals competing without the advantages associated with early career signals of high potential. KeywordsCAHRS, ILR, center, human resource, job, worker, advanced, labor market, satisfaction, employee, work, manage, management, training, HRM, employ, model, industrial relations, labor market, cognitive ability, career, career attainment, sucess, employee, knowledge, skill, information This paper has not undergone formal review or approval of the faculty of the ILR School. It is intended to make results of Center research, conferences, and projects available to others interested in human resource management in preliminary form to encourage discussion and suggestions.Cognitive Ability 2 AbstractThree explanations regarding the prediction that early career success will moderate the

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 42%

Cognitive ability and career attainment: Moderating effects of early career success.

Dreher

Bretz²

1991

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although metaanalyses with few studies may increase variability in effect sizes, they do not affect the mean estimates (Schmidt et al, 1985). One strength of the present study is that it highlights precisely where more research is needed.…”

Section: Limitations and Implications For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Because of this, we were unable to make conclusive statements about effect sizes for all potential predictors of individual innovation. Despite this limitation this study still makes several important contributions, for even small meta-analyses are less likely to lead to error than narrative reviews (Schmidt, Hunter, Pearlman, & Hirsh, 1985). Many relationships were distinguishable from zero and evidence exists suggesting that non-zero relationships will likely hold when more studies are included.…”

Section: Limitations and Implications For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of individual-level innovation at work: A meta-analysis.

Hammond¹,

Neff²,

Farr³

et al. 2011

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts

595

625

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous narrative reviews related to innovation in work organizations have been published, yet very few quantitative reviews have been conducted. The present meta-analysis investigates the relationships between four predictor types (individual differences, motivation, job characteristics, and contextual influences) and individual-level workplace innovation. Results indicated that individual factors, characteristics of the job, and factors of the environment were moderately associated with phases of the innovation process. Implications for future research opportunities are discussed. Keywords:Innovation, meta-analysis, personality, climate, motivation, leadership Meta-Analysis of Individual Innovation 4Predictors of Individual-Level Innovation at Work: A Meta-AnalysisThe importance of innovation for organizational success has been increasingly noted in the conceptual and empirical literature of the organizational sciences (e.g., Agars, Kaufman, & Locke, 2008; Anderson, De Dreu, & Nijstad, 2004;West, 2002). In response to the emergence of innovation as a critical factor in creating and maintaining organizational competitiveness, a wide array of individual, job, and environmental factors have been examined in relation to employee innovation. Although numerous narrative reviews of work-related innovation have been published (e.g., Egan, 2005;Mumford, 2003;Patterson, 2002;Shalley & Gilson, 2004;Shalley, Zhou, & Oldham, 2004;Zhou & Shalley, 2003), little attention has been given to quantitative reviews. Baas, DeDreu, and Nijstad (2008) conducted a meta-analysis on mood and creativity; however, the majority of the included studies were laboratory experiments with student participants. With the exception of one meta-analysis of organizational level innovation (Damanpour, 1991), a second examining personality and creativity for artists and scientists

show abstract

“…Results should therefore be interpreted with caution. Despite the existence of second-order sampling error, the optimal method for aggregating findings is still meta-analysis, as narrative reviews of this literature would be more likely to lead to error (Schmidt, Hunter, Pearlman, & Hirsh, 1985). Other meta-analyses with a similarly small number of studies have been published and successful in stimulating future research (e.g., Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz, & Lima, 2004;Riketta, 2008).…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%