1971
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1971.tb00374.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predictors, Criteria, and Significant Results

Abstract: Wm are concerned with the relative frequency of significant findings, termed "Significance Batting Averages" (SBA) , associated with classes of predictors and criteria, especially with regard 519

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

1980
1980
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Ghiselli (1966) found an average validity coefficient between test and performance of 0.19 in the studies conducted between 1920 and 1966. The researches of Lent, Aurbach, and Levin (1971) and Smith et al (1973) further supported this finding. However, a subsequent survey of the studies extended to 1973 by Ghiselli (1973) showed the average coefficient to improve to 0.22.…”
mentioning
confidence: 72%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Ghiselli (1966) found an average validity coefficient between test and performance of 0.19 in the studies conducted between 1920 and 1966. The researches of Lent, Aurbach, and Levin (1971) and Smith et al (1973) further supported this finding. However, a subsequent survey of the studies extended to 1973 by Ghiselli (1973) showed the average coefficient to improve to 0.22.…”
mentioning
confidence: 72%
“…Various attempts have been made to suggest models for developing criteria. Cravens and Woodruff's (1973) Model of Sales Territory Performance for Salesman, and Lent et al's. (1971) Significant Batting Average Methods are just two examples.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Taking this concept a bit further, it is worth noting that a common means of collecting traditional performance data is the use of supervisor ratings (Borman, Bryant & Dorio, 2010;Landy & Farr, 1980;Lent, Aurbach, & Levin, 1971). For more typical forms of performance, supervisor ratings are valuable given that supervisors often have an appropriate mental model for what performance should be (Becker & Klimoski, 1989;Cascio, 1998).…”
Section: Veiled Nature Of Creative Performancementioning
confidence: 98%
“…A number of considerations made the application of ratings for performance evaluations most popular in spite of their potential deficiencies and limitations: (1) situations such as combat do not allow for any other measure of performance, (2) even when hard data measures are obtained their meaning is defined by judgments, (3) evaluations are functional to the organization and are required in its processes, (4) they are the most immediate, available and inexpensive indicator for subordinate performance (Lent et al, 1971;Bernardin & Bitty, 1984).…”
Section: The Use Of Ratings As Performance Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%