Psychology 5707

PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY Fall 2011 Proefessors Professor Deniz S. Ones Office: N472 Elliott Hall Phone: 625-4551 Office hours: by appointment E-mail: [email protected]

Professor John P. Campbell Office: N478 Elliott Hall Phone: 625-9351 Office hours: by appointment E-mail: [email protected]

Teaching Assistants Brenton Wiernik Office: S458 Elliott Hall Office hours: Tuesdays 1:00-2:20pm [email protected] E-mail:

Mike Natali Office: N489 Elliott Hall Office hours: Tuesdays 1:00-2:00pm [email protected] E-mail:

Course Description and Objectives This is a course in personnel and industrial psychology with a special emphasis on performance assessment, personnel selection and employee training. The purpose of this class is to present the students with a current overview of personnel and industrial psychology. The emphasis will be on the most recent scientific evidence for various selection techniques, assessment tools, training interventions, as well as modeling, predicting and enhancing job performance. Texts (required) For Part I: Cascio, W. F., & Aguinis, H. (2004). Applied psychology in human resource management (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. The book can be acquired at the bookstore. However, it is an old edition, so used copies can be found online for as little as $5. Alternatively, electronic copies can also be found online for a very low price. For Part II: Goldstein, I. L., & Ford, J. K. (2001). Training in Organizations (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Other Required Readings: There are several additional required readings consisting of individual articles or book chapters, listed in the attached reference list (marked by ). You can download pdf copies of all readings on the class website by logging in with your x500 ID at: https://moodle.umn.edu Course Evaluation Exams There will be two exams. The first exam will only cover the material for PART I. The second exam will only cover the material for PART II. The exam questions will use a variety of formats: multiple choice, matching, multiple true/false, definitions, short answer, essays, and problems. A study guide containing sample practice questions will be handed out. Make up exams will only be provided to those individuals who provide written documentation of dire emergency. The make-up exam for the 1st exam will be given during the last week of classes. Assignments Graduate students will be required to complete an additional assignment for each part of the course (Part I and II). Details will be provided on separate handouts by the respective professors. Grades Exams will be graded by the professors and the TAs (TAs do not grade graduate student exams). For undergraduates, the course grade will be based on the sum of the two exam scores. For graduate students, grades will be based on the sum of the two exam scores, plus the two assignments. Attendance Students are expected to attend class on a regular basis, during which time the professors will highlight the more important aspects of the text, explain some of the more difficult points, and most importantly add material supplementary to the text.

2

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Scholastic Dishonesty The University of Minnesota defines scholastic dishonesty as "…plagiarizing; cheating on assignments or examinations; engaging in unauthorized collaboration on academic work; taking, acquiring, or using test materials without faculty permission; submitting false or incomplete records of academic achievement; acting alone or in cooperation with another to falsify records or to obtain dishonestly grades, honors, awards, or professional endorsement; altering, forging, or misusing a University academic record; or fabricating or falsifying data, research procedures, or data analysis." Assignments for this class will be checked for originality using a plagiarism detection software. Also, please familiarize yourself with the Student Conduct Code, which is available online (www1.umn.edu/regents/policies/academic/Student_Conduct_Code.pdf). Students with Special Needs Students who are at a disadvantage dealing with the conventional written test format under conditions of limited time (e.g., learning disabilities, visual difficulties, etc.) should arrange to have extra time for exam taking. To make arrangements, students should contact the professors or teaching assistant as early as possible.

3

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Readings for Part I For a list of required textbook chapters, please refer to the course schedule. All of the readings below are required for graduate students.  = required journal readings for undergraduates (in addition to textbook chapters).

Applicant Reactions Anderson, N., Salgado, J. F., & Hulsheger, U. R. (2010). Applicant reactions in selection: Comprehensive meta-analysis into reaction generalization versus situational specificity. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18, 291-304. Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., Sanchez R. J., et al. (2001). Applicant reactions to selection: Development of the Selection Procedural Justice Scale (SPJS). Personnel Psychology, 54, 387-419. Chan, D., & Schmitt, N. (2004). An agenda for future research on applicant reactions to selection procedures: A construct-oriented approach. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12, 9-23. Hausknecht, J. P., Day, D. V., & Thomas, S. C. (2004). Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 57, 639-683. Assessment Centers Arthur, W., Day, E. A., McNelly, T. L., & Edens, P. S. (2003). A meta-analysis of the criterionrelated validity of assessment center dimensions. Personnel Psychology, 56, 125-154. Bowler, M. C., & Woehr, D. J. (2006). A meta-analytic evaluation of the impact of dimension and exercise factors on assessment center ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1114-1124. Collins, J. M., Schmidt, F. L., Sanchez-Ku, M., Thomas, L., McDaniel, M. A., & Le, H. (2003). Can basic individual differences shed light on the construct meaning of assessment center evaluations? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 17-29. Dean, M. A., Bobko, P., & Roth, P. L. (2008). Ethnic and gender subgroup differences in assessment center ratings: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 685-691. Dilchert, S., & Ones, D. S. (2009). Assessment center dimensions: Individual differences correlates and meta-analytic incremental validity. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 254-270.  Gaugler, B. B., Rosenthal, D. B., Thornton, G. C., & Bentson, C. (1987). Meta-analysis of assessment center validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 493-511. Hermelin, E., Lievens, F., & Robertson, I. T. (2007). The validity of assessment centres for the prediction of supervisory performance ratings: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 405-411. 4

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Jansen, P. G. W., & Stoop, B. A. M. (2001). The dynamics of assessment center validity: Results of a 7-year study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 741-753. Lance, C. E., Lambert, T. A., Gewin, A. G., Lievens, F., & Conway, J. M. (2004). Revised estimates of dimension and exercise variance components in assessment center postexercise dimension ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 377-385. Lievens, F., &Conway, J. M. (2001). Dimension and exercise variance in assessment center scores: A large-scale evaluation of multitrait-multimethod studies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1202-1222. Woehr, D. J., & Arthur, W. (2003). The construct-related validity of assessment center ratings: A review and meta-analysis of the role of methodological factors. Journal of Management, 29, 231-258. Biodata Carlson, K. D., Scullen, S. E., Schmidt, F. L., Rothstein, H., & Erwin, F. (1999). Generalizable biographical data validity can be achieved without multi-organizational development and keying. Personnel Psychology, 52, 731-755.  Rothstein, H. R., Schmidt, F. L., Erwin, F. W., Owens, W. A., & Sparks, P. C. (1990). Biographical data in employment selection: Can validities be made generalizable? Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 175-184. Cognitive Ability Tests Dilchert, S., Ones, D. S., Davis, R. D., & Rostow, C. D. (2007). Cognitive ability predicts objectively measured counterproductive work behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 616-627. Dunnette, M. D. (1976). Aptitudes, abilities, and skills. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (1st ed., pp. 223-327). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.  Gottfredson, L. S. (1997). Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence, 24, 79-132. Kuncel, N. R., Ones, D. S., & Sackett, P. R. (2010). Individual differences as predictors of work, educational, and broad life outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences, 331-336.  Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Dilchert, S. (2005). Cognitive ability in personnel selection decisions. In A. Evers, O. Voskuijl & N. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of selection (pp. 143-173). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.  Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C. & Salgado, J. F. (2010). Cognitive abilities. In J. L. Farr & N. T. Tippins (Eds.), Handbook of employee selection (pp. 255-275). New York: Routledge.

5

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., & Viswesvaran, C. (in press). Cognitive abilities. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Oxford handbook of assessment and selection. Oxford, UK. Oxford University Press. Ree, M. J., Earles, J. A., & Teachout, M. S. (1994). Predicting job performance: Not much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 518-524. Reeve, C. L., & Hakel, M. D. (2002). Asking the right questions about g. Human Performance, 15, 47-74. Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2002). Agreements and disagreements on the role of general mental ability (GMA) in industrial, work, and organizational psychology. Human Performance, 15, 212-231. Combining Predictors Bobko, P., Roth, P. L., & Potosky, D. (1999). Derivation and implications of a meta-analytic matrix incorporating cognitive ability, alternative predictors, and job performance. Personnel Psychology, 52, 561-589. De Corte, W., Lievens, F., & Sackett, P. R. (2008). Validity and adverse impact potential of predictor composite formation. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 16, 183-194.  Highhouse, S. (2008). Stubborn reliance on intuition and subjectivity in employee selection. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 333342. Potosky, D., Bobko, P., & Roth, P. L. (2005). Forming composites of cognitive ability and alternative measures to predict job performance and reduce adverse impact: Corrected estimates and realistic expectations. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 304-315.  Murphy, K. R., Dzieweczynski, J. L., & Zhang, Y. (2009). Positive manifold limits the relevance of content-matching strategies for validating selection test batteries. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1018-1031.  Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274. Fairness, Bias and Differential Prediction  Hunter, J. E., Schmidt, F. L., & Rauschenberger, J. M. (1977). Fairness of psychological tests: Implications of four definitions for selection utility and minority hiring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 245-260. Nijenhuis, J. t., & van der Flier, H. (2000). Differential prediction of immigrant versus majority group training performance using cognitive ability and personality measures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8, 54-60.

6

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Roth, P. L., Bobko, P., & Switzer III, F. S. (2006). Modeling the behavior of the 4/5ths rule for determining adverse impact: Reasons for caution. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 507-522. Rotundo, M., & Sackett, P. R. (1999). Effect of rater race on conclusions regarding differential prediction in cognitive ability tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 815-822. Saad, S., & Sackett, P. R. (2002). Investigating differential prediction by gender in employmentoriented personality measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 667-674. Sackett, P. R., Laczo, R. M., & Lippe, Z. P. (2003). Differential prediction and the use of multiple predictors: The omitted variables problem. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1046-1056. Fit Arthur, W., Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., & Doverspike, D. (2006). The use of person-organization fit in employment decision making: An assessment of its criterion-related validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 786-801. Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1997). Interviewers' perceptions of person-organization fit and organizational selection decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 546-561.  Hoffman, B. J., & Woehr, D. J. (2006). A quantitative review of the relationship between person-organization fit and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 389-399.  Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individual's fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, persongroup, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281-342. Verquer, M. L., Beehr, T. A., & Wagner, S. H. (2003). A meta-analysis of relations between person-organization fit and work attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 473-489. Integrity Testing Berry, C. M., Sackett, P. R., & Wiemann, S. (2007). A review of recent developments in integrity test research. Personnel Psychology, 60, 271-301. Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1998). Gender, age, and race differences on overt integrity tests: Results across four large-scale job applicant datasets. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 35-42. Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (2001). Integrity tests and other criterion-focused occupational personality scales (COPS) used in personnel selection. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 31-39. Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (2007). Labor market influences on personality scale scores among job applicants - Four field studies in personnel selection settings. Zeitschrift fur Personalpsychologie, 6, 71-84. 7

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

 Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Schmidt, F. L. (1993). Comprehensive meta-analysis of integrity test validities: Findings and implications for personnel selection and theories of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 679-703.  Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F. L., & Lykken, D. (1996). Controversies in integrity testing: Two viewpoints. Journal of Business and Psychology, 10, 487-501. Interviews Conway, J. M., Jako, R. A., & Goodman, D. F. (1995). A meta-analysis of interrater and internal consistency reliability of selection interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 565579. Huffcutt, A. I., Conway, J. M., Roth, P. L., & Stone, N. J. (2001). Identification and metaanalytic assessment of psychological constructs measured in employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 897-913. Huffcutt, A. I., & Roth, P. L. (1998). Racial group differences in employment interview evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 179-189. Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., & Cable, D. M. (2000). The employment interview: A review of recent research and recommendations for future research. Human Resource Management Review, 10, 383-406. Levashina, J., Campion, M. A. (2007). Measuring faking in the employment interview: Development and validation of an Interview faking behavior scale. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1638-1656.  McDaniel, M. A., Whetzel, D. L., Schmidt, F. L., & Maurer, S. D. (1994). The validity of employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 599-616. Posthuma, R.A., Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2002). Beyond employment interview validity: A comprehensive narrative review of recent research and trends over time. Personnel Psychology, 55, 1-81 Roth, P. L., Van Iddekinge, C. H., Huffcutt, A. I., Eidson Jr., C. E., & Schmit, M. J. (2005). Personality saturation in structured interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 261-273. Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S. (2002). Comprehensive meta-analysis of the construct validity of the employment interview. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11, 299-324. Schmidt, F. L., & Rader, M. (1999). Exploring the boundary conditions for interview validity: Meta-analytic validity findings for a new interview type. Personnel Psychology, 52, 445464.

8

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Schmidt, F. L., & Zimmerman, R. D. (2004). A counterintuitive hypothesis about employment interview validity and some supporting evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 553-561. Van Iddekinge, C. H., Sager, C. E., Burnfield, J. L., & Heffner, T. S. (2006). The variability of criterion-related validity estimates among interviewers and interview panels. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 193-205. Job Knowledge, Experience, and Work Samples Bobko, P., Roth, P. L., & Buster, M. A. (2005). Work sample selection tests and expected reduction in adverse impact: A cautionary note. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 1-10.  McCloy, R. A., Campbell, J. P., & Cudeck, R. (1994). A confirmatory test of a model of performance determinants. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 493-505. McEvoy, G. M., & Cascio, W. F. (1989). Cumulative evidence of the relationship between employee age and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 11-17.  Quinones, M. A., Ford, J. K., & Teachout, M. S. (1995). The relationship between work experience and job performance: A conceptual and meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 48, 887-910. Roth, P. L., Bobko, P., & McFarland, L. A. (2005). A meta-analysis of work sample test validity: Updating and integrating some classic literature. Personnel Psychology, 58, 1009-1037.  Schmidt, F. L., Hunter, J. E., & Outerbridge, A. N. (1986). Impact of job experience and ability on job knowledge, work sample performance, and supervisory ratings of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 432-439.  Schmidt, F. L., Hunter, J. E., Outerbridge, A. N., & Goff, S. (1988). Joint relation of experience and ability with job performance: Test of three hypotheses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 46-57. Legal Issues, Fairness, and EEO  Campbell, J. P. (1996). Group differences and personnel decisions: Validity, fairness, and affirmative action. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 122-158.  Myors, B., Lievens, F., Schollart, E., Van Hoye, G., Cronshaw, S. F., Mlandinic, A., et al. (2008). International perspectives on the legal environment for selection. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 206-256. Ployhart, R. E., & Holtz, B. C. (2008). The diversity-validity dilemma: Strategies for reducing racioethnic and sex subgroup differences and adverse impact in selection. Personnel Psychology, 61, 153-172. Sackett, P. R., & Ellingson, J. E. (1997). The effects of forming multi-predictor composites on group differences and adverse impact. Personnel Psychology, 50, 707-721. 9

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

 Sackett, P. R., Schmitt, N., Ellingson, J. E., & Kabin, M. B. (2001). High-stakes testing in employment, credentialing, and higher education: Prospects in a post-affirmative-action world. American Psychologist, 56, 302-318. Sackett, P. R., & Wilk, S. L. (1994). Within-group norming and other forms of score adjustment in preemployment testing. American Psychologist, 49, 929-954.  Schmidt, F. L. (1988). The problem of group differences in ability test scores in employment selection. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 33, 272-292. Measuring Individual Differences: Reliability, Validity, and Prediction Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1977). Development of a general solution to the problem of validity generalization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 529-540. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1980). The future of criterion-related validity. Personnel Psychology, 33, 41-60.  Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1981). Employment testing: Old theories and new research findings. American Psychologist, 36, 1128-1137. Modeling Job Performance  Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10, 99-109.  Campbell, J. P., Gasser, M. B., & Oswald, F. L. (1996). The substantive nature of job performance variability. In K. R. Murphy (Ed.), Individual differences and behavior in organizations (pp. 258-299). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hoffman, B. J., Blair, C. A., Meriac, J. P., & Woehr, D. J. (2007). Expanding the criterion domain? A quantitative review of the OCB literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 555-566. Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 475-480. Ones, D. S., & Dilchert, S. (in press). Counterproductive work behaviors: Concepts, measurement, and nomological network. In N. R. Kuncel (Ed.), APA Handbook of testing and assessment in psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.  Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (2003). Personality and counterproductive work behaviors. In A. Sagie, S. Stashevsky & M. Koslowsky (Eds.), Misbehavior and Dysfunctional Attitudes in Organizations (pp. 211-249). Hampshire, UK: Palgrave/MacMillan. Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48, 775-802. Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F. L., & Ones, D. S. (2005). Is there a general factor in ratings of job performance? A meta-analytic framework for disentangling substantive and error influences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 108-131. 10

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Other Predictors Blakley, B. R., Quinones, M. A., Crawford, M. S., & Jago, I. (1994). The validity of isometric strength tests. Personnel Psychology, 47, 247-274. Hoffman, C. C. (1999). Generalizing physical ability test validity: A case study using test transportability, validity generalization, and construct-related validation evidence. Personnel Psychology, 52, 1019-1041. Mol, S. T., Born, M. P., Willemsen, M. E., & Van Der Molen, H. T. (2005). Predicting expatriate job performance for selection purposes: A quantitative review. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 590-620. Roth, P. L., BeVier, C. A., Switzer, F. S., & Schippmann, J. S. (1996). Meta-analyzing the relationship between grades and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 548-556. Overview  Hough, L. M., & Oswald, F. L. (2000). Personnel selection: Looking toward the future Remembering the past. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 631-664.  Sackett, P. R., & Lievens, F. (2008). Personnel selection. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 419-450.  Salgado, J. F., Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2001). Predictors used for personnel selection: An overview of constructs, methods and techniques. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology (Vol. 1: Personnel psychology, pp. 165-199). London, UK: Sage.  Schmidt, F. L., Ones, D. S., & Hunter, J. E. (1992). Personnel selection. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 627-670.  Winfred, A., &Villado, A. J. (2008). The importance of distinguishing between constructs and methods when comparing predictors in personnel selection research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 435-442. Performance Measurement and Appraisal Arvey, R. D., & Murphy, K. R. (1998). Performance evaluation in work settings. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 141-168. Borman, W. C. (1997). 360 degree ratings: An analysis of assumptions and a research agenda for evaluating their validity. Human Resource Management Review, 7, 299-315. McGregor, D. (1987). An uneasy look at performance appraisal. Training & Development Journal, 41, 66-69.  Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2000). Perspectives on models of job performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8, 216-226. 11

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Viswesvaran, C., Ones, D. S., & Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 557-574. Personality  Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26. Berry, C. M., Ones, D. S., & Sackett, P. R. (2007). Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance, and their common correlates: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 410-424. Dilchert, S., Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Deller, J. (2006). Response distortion in personality measurement: Born to deceive, yet capable of providing valid self-assessments? Psychology Science, 48, 209-225.  Hogan, R., Hogan, J., & Roberts, B. W. (1996). Personality measurement and employment decisions: Questions and answers. American Psychologist, 51, 469-477. Hough, L. M., Eaton, N. K., Dunnette, M. D., Kamp, J. D., & McCloy, R. A. (1990). Criterionrelated validities of personality constructs and the effect of response distortion on those validities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 581-595.  Hough, L. M., & Ones, D. S. (2001). The structure, measurement, validity, and use of personality variables in industrial, work, and organizational psychology. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. Sinangil Kepir & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work, and organizational psychology (Vol. 1: Personnel psychology, pp. 233-277). London, UK: Sage. Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999). The Big Five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel Psychology, 52, 621-652.  Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Judge, T. A. (2007). In support of personality assessment in organizational settings. Personnel Psychology,60, 995-1027. Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (2001). Personality at work: Criterion-focused occupational personality scales used in personnel selection. In B. W. Roberts & R. Hogan (Eds.), Personality psychology in the workplace (pp. 63-92). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.  Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Dilchert, S. (2005). Personality at work: Raising awareness and correcting misconceptions. Human Performance, 18, 389-404. Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Reiss, A. D. (1996). Role of social desirability in personality testing for personnel selection: The red herring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 660679.

12

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Recruitment and Job Analysis Chapman, D. S., Uggerslev, K. L., Carroll, S. A., Piasentin, K. A., & Jones, D. A. (2005). Applicant attraction to organizations and job choice: A meta-analytic review of the correlates of recruiting outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 928-944. Cornelius, E. T. (1988). Practical findings from job analysis research. In S. Gael (Ed.), The job analysis handbook for business, industry and government (Vol. 1, pp. 48-68). New York: Wiley. Dierdorff, E. C., & Wilson, M. (2003). A meta-analysis of job analysis reliability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 635-646. Jeanneret, P. R., & Strong, M. H. (2003). Linking O*NET job analysis information to job requirement predictors: An O*NET application. Personnel Psychology, 56, 465-492. Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (1997). Social and cognitive sources of potential inaccuracy in job analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 627-655. Pearlman, K. (1980). Job families: A review and discussion of their implications for personnel selection. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 1-28. Rynes, S. L., Orlitzky, M. O., & Bretz, R. D. (1997). Experienced hiring versus college recruiting: Practices and emerging trends. Personnel Psychology, 50, 309-339. Shippmann, J. S., Ash, R. A., Battista, M., Carr, L., Eyde, L. D., Hesketh, B., et al. (2000). The practice of competency modeling. Personnel Psychology, 53, 703-740. Situational Judgment Tests Chan, D. (2006). Interactive effects of situational judgment effectiveness and proactive personality on work perceptions and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 475-481.  McDaniel, M. A., Hartman, N. S., Whetzel, D. L., & Grubb III, W. L. (2007). Situational judgment tests, response instructions, and validity: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60, 63-91. McDaniel, M. A., Morgeson, F. P., Finnegan, E. B., Campion, M. A., & Braverman, E. P. (2001). Use of situational judgment tests to predict job performance: A clarification of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 730-740. Utility Cabrera, E. F., & Raju, N. S. (2001). Utility analysis: Current trends and future directions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 92-102. Carson, K. P., Becker, J. S., & Henderson, J. A. (1998). Is utility really futile? A failure to replicate and an extension. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 84-96.

13

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Hoffman, C. C., & Thornton, G. C. (1997). Examining selection utility where competing predictors differ in adverse impact. Personnel Psychology, 50, 455-470. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1982). Fitting people to jobs: Implications of personnel selection for national productivity. In E. A. Fleishman & M. D. Dunnette (Eds.), Human performance and productivity (Vol. I, pp. 233-284). Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1983). Quantifying the effects of psychological interventions on employee job performance and work-force productivity. American Psychologist, 38, 473478. Hunter, J. E., Schmidt, F. L., & Coggin, T. D. (1988). Problems and pitfalls in using capital budgeting and financial accounting techniques in assessing the utility of personnel programs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 522-528.  Judiesch, M. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Mount, M. K. (1992). Estimates of the dollar value of employee output in utility analyses: An empirical test of two theories. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 234-250. Roth, P. L., Bobko, P., & Mabon, H. (2001). Utility analysis: A review and analysis at the turn of the century. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 383-384). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schmidt, F. L., & Hoffmann, B. (1973). Empirical comparison of three methods of assessing utility of a selection device. Journal of Industrial & Organizational Psychology, 1, 13-22. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1983). Individual differences in productivity: An empirical test of estimates derived from studies of selection procedure utility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 407-414.  Schmidt, F. L., Hunter, J. E., McKenzie, R. C., & Muldrow, T. W. (1979). Impact of valid selection procedures on work-force productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 609626.

14

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Readings for Part II Note: Reading required for graduate students only are marked “additional reading for graduate students.” These readings are in addition to the textbook chapters listed on the schedule. Week 8 Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116-127. Additional reading for graduate students: Ackerman, P. L. (1987). Individual differences in skill learning: An integration of psychometric and information processing perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 3-27. Week 9 Anderson, L., & Wilson, S. (1997). Critical incident technique. In D. L. Whetzel & G. R. Wheaton (Eds.), Applied measurement methods in industrial psychology (pp. 89-112). Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black Publishing. Dipboye, R. L. (1997). Organizational barriers to implementing a rational model of training. In M. A. Quinones & A. Ehrenstein (Eds.), Training for a rapidly changing workplace: Applications of psychological research (pp. 31-60). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Additional reading for graduate students: Gagne, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1988). Principles of instructional design (3rd ed.). New York City, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Week 10 Campbell, J. P., & Kuncel, N. R. (2002). Individual and team training. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 278-312). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kraiger, K. (2008). Transforming our models of learning and development: Web-based instruction as enabler of third-generation instruction. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 454-467. Mayer, R.E. (2004). Should there be a three strikes rule against pure discovery learning: The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59, 14-19. Schmidt, R. A., & Bjork, R. A. (1992). New conceptualizations of practice: Common principles in three paradigms suggest new concepts for training. Psychological Science, 3, 207-217. Week 11 Holladay, C. L., & Quinones, M. A. (2003). Practice Variability and Transfer of Training: The Role of Self-Efficacy Generality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1094-1103. Campbell, M., & Beier, M.E. (2010). The effectiveness of error management training with working-aged adults. Personnel Psychology, 63, 641-676.

15

PSY 5707: Fall 2011 Personnel Psychology

Colquitt, J. A., & Simmering, M. J. (1998). Conscientiousness, goal orientation, and motivation to learn during the learning process: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 654-665. Mathieu, J. E., & Martineau, J. W. (1997). Individual and situational influences on training motivation. In J. K. Ford, S. W. J. Kozlowski, K. Kraiger, E. Salas & M. S. Teachout (Eds.), Improving training effectiveness in work organizations (pp. 193-222). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Additional reading for graduate students: Snow, R. E. (1989). Aptitude-treatment interactions as a framework for research on individual differences in learning. In P. L. Ackerman, R. J. Sternberg & R. Glaser (Eds.), Learning and individual differences: Advances in theory and research (pp. 13-59). New York City, NY: Freeman. Week 12 Hambleton, R. K. (1980). Test-score validity and standard setting methods. In R. A. Berk (Ed.), Criterion referenced measurement: The state of the art. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Week 13 Frayne, C. A., & Geringer, J. M. (2000). Self-management training for improving job performance: A field experiment involving salespeople. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 361-372. Baldwin, T. T. (1992). Effects of alternative modeling strategies on outcomes of interpersonalskills training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 147-154. Latham, G. P., & Saari, L. M. (1979). Application of social-learning theory to training supervisors through behavioral modeling. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 239-246. Additional reading for graduate students: Cook, T. D., Campbell, D. T., & Peracchio, L. (1990). Quasi experimentation. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 491-576). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Week 14 Lehman, D. R., Lempert, R. O., & Nisbett, R. E. (1988). The effects of graduate training on reasoning: Formal discipline and thinking about everyday-life events. American Psychologist, 43, 431-442. Helmreich, R. L., & Foushee, H. C. (1993). Why crew resource management? Empirical and theoretical bases of human factors training in aviation. In E. L. Wiener, B. G. Kanki & R. L. Helmreich (Eds.), Cockpit resource management. (pp. 3-45). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Week 15 TBA

16

Schedule and Readings for Part I: Personnel Selection

1

Date

September 8

• Basic review of relevant statistics & measurement Appendix B concepts 6, 7, & 13 (pp. 308• Measuring individual differences: Concepts of 328) reliability, validation, and prediction • Predicting job performance: The old versus the new model of personnel selection 4&5 • Criterion construction • Modeling and measuring job performance • Performance appraisal

September 15

September 20

• Cognitive ability tests

September 22

• Work samples and job knowledge measures • The role of experience Noncognitive predictors: • Personality inventories • Integrity tests

September 27

4 September 29 October 4

October 6

October 11 October 13

6

• Recruitment and job analysis Past predictors: • Biodata • Grades • References Assessment methods: • Assessment centers • Interviews • Situational judgment tests Other predictors: Drug testing, graphology, etc. Making personnel decisions: Selection, classification, and placement • Combining predictors • Legal issues and EEO • Fairness in personnel management • Bias and differential prediction models

October 18

Utility theory and applications

October 20

Review for 1st exam

October 25

FIRST EXAM

7 8

(Cascio & Aguinis)

• Introduction to personnel psychology

2

5

Textbook chapters

September 6

September 13

3

Topic

1&3

Required Journal Article Readings

Required Graduate Student Readings

Hough & Oswald (2000), Sackett & Lievens (2008), Salgado et al. (2001), Schmidt et al. (1992), Winfred &Villado (2008) Schmidt & Hunter (1981)

Borman & Motowidlo (1997), Campbell et al. (1996), Ones & Viswesvaran (2003), Viswesvaran &Ones (2000) Gottfredson (1997), Ones et al. (2005), Ones, Dilchert, Viswesvaran, & Salgado (2010) McCloy et al. (1994), Quinones et al. (1995), Schmidt et al. (1986, 1988) Barrick & Mount (1991), Hogan et al. (1996), Hough & Ones (2001), Ones et al. (1993, 1996, 2005, 2007), Hoffman & Woehr (2006), Kristof-Brown et al. (2005)

9 & 11 14 (pp. 341 – 364)

Rothstein et al. (1990)

14 (pp. 365-374)

Gaugler et al. (1987), McDaniel et al. (1994, 2007)

12 2, 8, & 18 14 (pp. 375 – 378) Appendix A

Schmidt & Hunter (1998), Hunter et al. (1977), Campbell (1996), Sackett et al. (2001), Schmidt (1988), Highhouse (2008), Murphy et al. (2009), Myors et al. (2008)

3, 13 (pp. 328-338)

Judiesch et al. (1992), Schmidt et al. (1979)

See respective readings under each topic in reference list.

Week

Schedule and Readings for Part II: Employee Training Week

Date

10

1&2

Cronbach (1975)

November 1 November 3

Determining training needs A model of training design • Specifying training objectives • Determining training content

3 4 (pp. 85-103)

Anderson &Wilson (1992)

November 8

A model of training design • Choosing instructional methods

7

Campbell & Kuncel (2001) Kraiger (2008) Mayer (2004)

November 10

4 (pp. 104-137)

Schmidt &Bjork (1992)

November 22 November 24 November 29

A model of training design • Using learning principles • Retention vs. transfer Learning and individual differences • Cognitive ability • Personality Learning and individual differences • Motivation Measuring training effects Thanksgiving Holiday Evaluating training effects

December 1 December 6 December 8 December 13 December 19

11 November 17

13 14 15

(Goldstein & Ford)

Required Journal Article Readings

• Training defined • Training achievement vs. job performance • The aptitude x treatment interaction

November 15

12

Textbook chapters

October 27

8 9

Topic

Dipboye (1997)

Holladay & Quinones (2003)

Recommended Graduate Student Readings Ackerman (1986)

Gagne, Briggs, & Wager (1988 – ch. 7)

Snow (1989)

Colquitt & Simmering (1998) Mathieu & Martineau (1997)

5

Hambleton (1980)

6

Frayne & Geringer (2000)

Teaching interpersonal skills

8

Baldwin (1991) Latham & Saari (1979)

Teaching problem solving and decision making Team training Overall research results FINAL EXAM 8:00-10:00 AM Room N391 Elliot Hall

8 (continued) 8 (continued)

Lehman, Lempert, &Nisbett (1988) Helmreich & Foushee (1993)

Cook, Campbell, & Peracchio (1990)