Range restriction corrections in personnel selection: A mixed range restriction correction approach to overcome a key limitation in applying Case V.

IF 9.4 1区心理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Journal of Applied Psychology Pub Date : 2025-03-27 DOI:10.1037/apl0001276

Huy Le, In-Sue Oh, Philip L Roth, Frank L Schmidt

{"title":"Range restriction corrections in personnel selection: A mixed range restriction correction approach to overcome a key limitation in applying Case V.","authors":"Huy Le, In-Sue Oh, Philip L Roth, Frank L Schmidt","doi":"10.1037/apl0001276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent advancements in range restriction (RR) correction research suggest that Case V (Dahlke & Wiernik, 2020; Le et al., 2016) is one of the most accurate approaches to correct for (indirect) RR. However, researchers have had difficulty applying the Case V approach, especially in validation and meta-analytic (including validity generalization) studies, because of the lack of information regarding one of its key components: the RR ratio of the criterion (uY), particularly in the context of job performance ratings. In the present study, we provide a solution to this problem by presenting a mixed approach using Case IV to estimate the uY of job performance ratings, a critical input in implementing Case V correction (by doing so, mixing Cases IV and V). The premise for this mixed approach hinges upon prior findings that Case IV yields the same unbiased estimates as does Case V as long as its \"full mediation\" assumption is met. The accuracy of the approach is then tested and compared to those of existing RR correction approaches (Cases II, IV, and V) using Monte Carlo simulations covering a wide range of conditions researchers may realistically encounter in their research. We discuss the present study's implications for personnel selection research and practice, along with study limitations and future research directions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001276","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent advancements in range restriction (RR) correction research suggest that Case V (Dahlke & Wiernik, 2020; Le et al., 2016) is one of the most accurate approaches to correct for (indirect) RR. However, researchers have had difficulty applying the Case V approach, especially in validation and meta-analytic (including validity generalization) studies, because of the lack of information regarding one of its key components: the RR ratio of the criterion (uY), particularly in the context of job performance ratings. In the present study, we provide a solution to this problem by presenting a mixed approach using Case IV to estimate the uY of job performance ratings, a critical input in implementing Case V correction (by doing so, mixing Cases IV and V). The premise for this mixed approach hinges upon prior findings that Case IV yields the same unbiased estimates as does Case V as long as its "full mediation" assumption is met. The accuracy of the approach is then tested and compared to those of existing RR correction approaches (Cases II, IV, and V) using Monte Carlo simulations covering a wide range of conditions researchers may realistically encounter in their research. We discuss the present study's implications for personnel selection research and practice, along with study limitations and future research directions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Applied Psychology Multiple-

CiteScore

17.60

自引率

6.10%

发文量

175

期刊介绍： The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including: 1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses). 2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research. 3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.