对选择中并发效度猜测的回应:对认知能力的影响

IF 11.5 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
D. Ones, C. Viswesvaran
{"title":"对选择中并发效度猜测的回应:对认知能力的影响","authors":"D. Ones, C. Viswesvaran","doi":"10.1017/iop.2023.43","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although we have many important areas of agreement with Sackett and colleagues1, we must address two issues that form the backbone of the focal article. First, we explain why range restriction corrections in concurrent validation are appropriate, describing the conceptual basis for range restriction corrections, and highlighting some pertinent technical issues that should elicit skepticism about the focal article’s assertions. Second, we disagree with the assertion that the operational validity of cognitive ability is much lower than previously reported. We conclude with some implications for applied practice.","PeriodicalId":47771,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice","volume":"16 1","pages":"358 - 365"},"PeriodicalIF":11.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A response to speculations about concurrent validities in selection: Implications for cognitive ability\",\"authors\":\"D. Ones, C. Viswesvaran\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/iop.2023.43\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although we have many important areas of agreement with Sackett and colleagues1, we must address two issues that form the backbone of the focal article. First, we explain why range restriction corrections in concurrent validation are appropriate, describing the conceptual basis for range restriction corrections, and highlighting some pertinent technical issues that should elicit skepticism about the focal article’s assertions. Second, we disagree with the assertion that the operational validity of cognitive ability is much lower than previously reported. We conclude with some implications for applied practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47771,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Industrial and Organizational Psychology-Perspectives on Science and Practice\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"358 - 365\"},\"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.2023.43\",\"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.2023.43","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

尽管我们与Sackett及其同事在许多重要领域达成了一致1,但我们必须解决构成重点文章支柱的两个问题。首先,我们解释了为什么并行验证中的范围限制更正是合适的,描述了范围限制更正的概念基础,并强调了一些相关的技术问题,这些问题应该引起对焦点文章断言的怀疑。其次,我们不同意认知能力的操作有效性比以前报道的要低得多的说法。最后,我们对应用实践提出了一些启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A response to speculations about concurrent validities in selection: Implications for cognitive ability
Although we have many important areas of agreement with Sackett and colleagues1, we must address two issues that form the backbone of the focal article. First, we explain why range restriction corrections in concurrent validation are appropriate, describing the conceptual basis for range restriction corrections, and highlighting some pertinent technical issues that should elicit skepticism about the focal article’s assertions. Second, we disagree with the assertion that the operational validity of cognitive ability is much lower than previously reported. We conclude with some implications for applied 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
7.70
自引率
10.10%
发文量
85
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.
×
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