The Hawthorne Experiments: First Statistical Interpretation

Franke, Richard; Kaul, James D.

doi:10.2307/2094540

Cited by 514 publications

(310 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

276

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Already in 1953, Argyle (30) concluded that the Hawthorne researchers provided "no quantitative evidence for the conclusion for which this experiment is famous, that the increase of output was due to a changed relationship with supervision" (p 100). Other critical accounts of the Hawthorne research have followed (1,3,10,12,14,16,(19)(20)(21)(31)(32)(33). Some of the critical authors performed secondary analyses on the original data; others interviewed original operators or supervisors.…”

Section: How Could This Story Emerge and Survive?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The “Hawthorne effect” is a myth, but what keeps the story going?

Kompier¹

2006

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: How Could This Story Emerge and Survive?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The “Hawthorne effect” is a myth, but what keeps the story going?

Kompier¹

2006

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In the social sciences the results of some "classic" studies were accepted for years even though they were erroneous. Among the more notable examples are J.B. Watson's conditioning of Little Albert, Cyril Burt's "twins" research (Samelson, 1980), and the Hawthorne Effect (Franke and Kaul, 1978).…”

Section: A Guard Against the Perpetuation Of Erroneous And Questionabmentioning

confidence: 99%

Replications and extensions in marketing: Rarely published but quite contrary

Hubbard

Armstrong

1994

International Journal of Research in Marketing

329

237

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Replication is rare in marketing. Of 1,120 papers sampled from three major marketing journals, none were replications. Only 1.8% of the papers were extensions, and they consumed 1.1% of the journal space. On average, these extensions appeared seven years after the original study. The publication rate for such works has been decreasing since the 1970s. Published extensions typically produced results that conflicted with the original studies; of the 20 extensions published, 12 conflicted with the earlier results, and only 3 provided full confirmation. Published replications do not attract as many citations after publication as do the original studies, even when the results fail to support the original studies. AbstractReplication is rare in marketing. Of 1,120 papers sampled from three major marketing journals, none were replications. Only 1.8% of the papers were extensions, and they consumed 1.1% of the journal space. On average, these extensions appeared seven years after the original study. The publication rate for such works has been decreasing since the 1970s. Published extensions typically produced results that conflicted with the original studies; of the 20 extensions published, 12 conflicted with the earlier results, and only 3 provided full confirmation. Published replications do not attract as many citations after publication as do the original studies, even when the results fail to support the original studies.

show abstract

“…Many similar studies have cited the Hawthorne effect as an indication that human performance exceeds routine performance when tested against automated system performance. 19 In conclusion, we present a closed-loop system that includes a novel user-interface for automatic administration of propofol and performs better than conventional manual control…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

A randomized controlled trial demonstrates that a novel closed-loop propofol system performs better hypnosis control than manual administration

Hemmerling

Charabati

Zaouter

et al. 2010

Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A randomized controlled trial demonstrates that a novel closed-loop propofol system performs better hypnosis control than manual administration Une étude randomisée contrôlée démontre qu'un système innovant d'administration de propofol en circuit fermé permet un meilleur contrôle de l'hypnose qu'une administration manuelle Abstract Purpose The purpose of this randomized control trial was to determine the performance of a novel rule-based adaptive closed-loop system for propofol administration using the bispectral index (BISÒ) and to compare the system's performance with manual administration. The effectiveness of the closed-loop system to maintain BIS close to a target of 45 was determined and compared with manual administration. Methods After Institutional Review Board approval and written consent, 40 patients undergoing major surgery in a tertiary university hospital were allocated to two groups using computer-generated block randomization. In the Closed-loop group (n = 20), closed-loop control was used to maintain anesthesia at a target BIS of 45, and in the Control group (n = 20), propofol was administered manually to maintain the same BIS target. To evaluate each technique's performance in maintaining a steady level of hypnosis, the BIS values obtained during the surgical procedure were stratified into four clinical performance categories relative to the target BIS: B 10%, 11-20%, 21-30%, or [ 30% defined as excellent, good, poor, or inadequate control of hypnosis, respectively. The controller performance was compared using Varvel's controller performance indices. Data were compared using Fisher's exact test and the Mann-Whitney U test, P \ 0.05 showing statistical significance. Results In the Closed-loop group, four females and 16 males (aged 54 ± 20 yr; weight 79 ± 7 kg) underwent anesthesia lasting 143 ± 57 min. During 55%, 29%, 9%, and 7% of the total anesthesia time, the system showed excellent, good, poor, and inadequate control, respectively. In the Control group, five females and 15 males (aged 59 ± 16 yr; weight 75 ± 13 kg) underwent anesthesia lasting 157 ± 81 min. Excellent, good, poor, and inadequate control were noted during 33%, 33%, 15%, and 19% of the total anesthesia time, respectively. In the This work was presented as an abstract at the annual meeting of the Society of Technology in Anesthesia in San Diego in January 2008. The abstract won the Excellence in Technology Innovation Award. Dr. Hemmerling is the inventor of the McSleepy(R) system, which is an automated system that integrates all three components of anesthesia -hypnosis, analgesia, and muscle relaxation. This system is patent pending; however, the ''loop'' for propofol administration within McSleepy is different from the propofol administration loop used in the present manuscript. Closed-loop group, excellent control of anesthesia occurred significantly more often (P \ 0.0001), and poor and inadequate control occurred less often than in the Control group (P \ 0.01). The median performance error and the median absolute performan...

show abstract

The Hawthorne Experiments: First Statistical Interpretation

Cited by 514 publications

References 22 publications

The “Hawthorne effect” is a myth, but what keeps the story going?

The “Hawthorne effect” is a myth, but what keeps the story going?

Replications and extensions in marketing: Rarely published but quite contrary

A randomized controlled trial demonstrates that a novel closed-loop propofol system performs better hypnosis control than manual administration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About