是不是也该重新审视情境特殊性了?

IF 11.5 3区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED

Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice Pub Date : 2023-08-31 DOI:10.1017/iop.2023.40

J. DeSimone, T. Fezzey

{"title":"是不是也该重新审视情境特殊性了?","authors":"J. DeSimone, T. Fezzey","doi":"10.1017/iop.2023.40","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sackett et al.’s (2023) focal article asserts that the predictors with the highest criterion-related validity in selection settings are specific to individual jobs and emphasizes the importance of adjusting for range restriction (and attenuation) using study-specific artifact estimates. These positions, along with other recent perspectives on meta-analysis, lead us to reassess the extent to which situational specificity (SS) is worth consideration in organizational selection contexts. In this commentary, we will (a) examine the historical context of both the SS and validity generalization (VG) perspectives, (b) evaluate evidence pertaining to these perspectives, and (c) consider whether it is possible for both perspectives to coexist.","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":"16 1","pages":"317 - 321"},"PeriodicalIF":11.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is it also time to revisit situational specificity?\",\"authors\":\"J. DeSimone, T. Fezzey\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/iop.2023.40\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Sackett et al.’s (2023) focal article asserts that the predictors with the highest criterion-related validity in selection settings are specific to individual jobs and emphasizes the importance of adjusting for range restriction (and attenuation) using study-specific artifact estimates. These positions, along with other recent perspectives on meta-analysis, lead us to reassess the extent to which situational specificity (SS) is worth consideration in organizational selection contexts. In this commentary, we will (a) examine the historical context of both the SS and validity generalization (VG) perspectives, (b) evaluate evidence pertaining to these perspectives, and (c) consider whether it is possible for both perspectives to coexist.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47771,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"317 - 321\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2023.40\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2023.40","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

Sackett等人（2023）的重点文章断言，在选择环境中具有最高标准相关有效性的预测因子是特定于个体工作的，并强调了使用研究特定伪影估计调整范围限制（和衰减）的重要性。这些立场，以及最近对荟萃分析的其他观点，使我们重新评估在组织选择背景下情境特异性（SS）值得考虑的程度。在这篇评论中，我们将（a）研究SS和有效性概括（VG）观点的历史背景，（b）评估与这些观点相关的证据，以及（c）考虑两种观点是否可能共存。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Is it also time to revisit situational specificity?

Sackett et al.’s (2023) focal article asserts that the predictors with the highest criterion-related validity in selection settings are specific to individual jobs and emphasizes the importance of adjusting for range restriction (and attenuation) using study-specific artifact estimates. These positions, along with other recent perspectives on meta-analysis, lead us to reassess the extent to which situational specificity (SS) is worth consideration in organizational selection contexts. In this commentary, we will (a) examine the historical context of both the SS and validity generalization (VG) perspectives, (b) evaluate evidence pertaining to these perspectives, and (c) consider whether it is possible for both perspectives to coexist.

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

Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED-

CiteScore

7.70

自引率

10.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice is a peer-reviewed academic journal published on behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. The journal focuses on interactive exchanges on topics of importance to the science and practice of the field. It features articles that present new ideas or different takes on existing ideas, stimulating dialogue about important issues in the field. Additionally, the journal is indexed and abstracted in Clarivate Analytics SSCI, Clarivate Analytics Web of Science, European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences (ERIH PLUS), ProQuest, PsycINFO, and Scopus.