在组织中实施基于证据的评估和选择:回顾和未来研究的议程

IF 3.9 1区 心理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT
Marvin Neumann, A. Niessen, Rob R. Meijer
{"title":"在组织中实施基于证据的评估和选择:回顾和未来研究的议程","authors":"Marvin Neumann, A. Niessen, Rob R. Meijer","doi":"10.1177/2041386620983419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In personnel- and educational selection, a substantial gap exists between research and practice, since evidence-based assessment instruments and decision-making procedures are underutilized. We provide an overview of studies that investigated interventions to encourage the use of evidence-based assessment methods, or factors related to their use. The most promising studies were grounded in self-determination theory. Training and autonomy in the design of evidence-based assessment methods were positively related to their use, while negative stakeholder perceptions decreased practitioners’ intentions to use evidence-based assessment methods. Use of evidence-based decision-making procedures was positively related to access to such procedures, information to use it, and autonomy over the procedure, but negatively related to receiving outcome feedback. A review of the professional selection literature showed that the implementation of evidence-based assessment was hardly discussed. We conclude with an agenda for future research on encouraging evidence-based assessment practice.","PeriodicalId":46914,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Psychology Review","volume":"11 1","pages":"205 - 239"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2041386620983419","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementing evidence-based assessment and selection in organizations: A review and an agenda for future research\",\"authors\":\"Marvin Neumann, A. Niessen, Rob R. Meijer\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/2041386620983419\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In personnel- and educational selection, a substantial gap exists between research and practice, since evidence-based assessment instruments and decision-making procedures are underutilized. We provide an overview of studies that investigated interventions to encourage the use of evidence-based assessment methods, or factors related to their use. The most promising studies were grounded in self-determination theory. Training and autonomy in the design of evidence-based assessment methods were positively related to their use, while negative stakeholder perceptions decreased practitioners’ intentions to use evidence-based assessment methods. Use of evidence-based decision-making procedures was positively related to access to such procedures, information to use it, and autonomy over the procedure, but negatively related to receiving outcome feedback. A review of the professional selection literature showed that the implementation of evidence-based assessment was hardly discussed. We conclude with an agenda for future research on encouraging evidence-based assessment practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"205 - 239\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2041386620983419\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386620983419\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386620983419","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

在人事和教育选择方面,研究与实践之间存在很大差距,因为基于证据的评估工具和决策程序没有得到充分利用。我们概述了调查干预措施的研究,以鼓励使用循证评估方法,或与使用相关的因素。最有希望的研究是基于自我决定理论的。基于证据的评估方法设计中的培训和自主权与它们的使用正相关,而负面的利益相关者感知降低了从业人员使用基于证据的评估方法的意图。循证决策程序的使用与获得此类程序、使用该程序的信息和程序自主权呈正相关,但与接收结果反馈呈负相关。对专业选择文献的回顾表明,循证评估的实施很少被讨论。最后,我们提出了鼓励循证评估实践的未来研究议程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Implementing evidence-based assessment and selection in organizations: A review and an agenda for future research
In personnel- and educational selection, a substantial gap exists between research and practice, since evidence-based assessment instruments and decision-making procedures are underutilized. We provide an overview of studies that investigated interventions to encourage the use of evidence-based assessment methods, or factors related to their use. The most promising studies were grounded in self-determination theory. Training and autonomy in the design of evidence-based assessment methods were positively related to their use, while negative stakeholder perceptions decreased practitioners’ intentions to use evidence-based assessment methods. Use of evidence-based decision-making procedures was positively related to access to such procedures, information to use it, and autonomy over the procedure, but negatively related to receiving outcome feedback. A review of the professional selection literature showed that the implementation of evidence-based assessment was hardly discussed. We conclude with an agenda for future research on encouraging evidence-based assessment practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
1.60%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Organizational Psychology Review is a quarterly, peer-reviewed scholarly journal published by SAGE in partnership with the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology. Organizational Psychology Review’s unique aim is to publish original conceptual work and meta-analyses in the field of organizational psychology (broadly defined to include applied psychology, industrial psychology, occupational psychology, organizational behavior, personnel psychology, and work psychology).Articles accepted for publication in Organizational Psychology Review will have the potential to have a major impact on research and practice in organizational psychology. They will offer analyses worth citing, worth following up on in primary research, and worth considering as a basis for applied managerial practice. As such, these should be contributions that move beyond straight forward reviews of the existing literature by developing new theory and insights. At the same time, however, they should be well-grounded in the state of the art and the empirical knowledge base, providing a good mix of a firm empirical and theoretical basis and exciting new ideas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信