Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:39:22.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Better at What?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Craig J. Russell
Craig J. Russell*
Affiliation:
University of Oklahoma
*
E-mail: [email protected], Address: Price College of Business, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In reading the title of Johnson et al.'s (2010) article on synthetic validity, I immediately asked myself “Better at what?” Motor oil serves three functions in internal combustion engines: lubricate, cool, and clean engine parts. There is little doubt that synthetic motor oil does all three of these better than nonsynthetic motor oil, although some might argue that it is not as cost effective. Johnson et al. described two approaches to synthetic validity and then argued why synthetic validity is “the best approach for many situations.” I strongly agree with their contention that synthetic validity is “practically useful” and with their less directly stated contention that it also holds value in developing theory. Hence, I will limit my comments exactly to how synthetic validity inferences might best contribute to the complimentary goals of advancing theory and practice, although these might cause Johnson et al. to rethink some of their observations.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , September 2010 , pp. 340 - 343
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2010 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Hunt, S. (1996). Generic work behavior: An investigation into the dimensions of entry-level, hourly job performance. Personnel Psychology, 49, 51–84.Google Scholar
Johnson, J. W., Steel, P., Scherbaum, C. A., Hoffman, C. C., Jeanneret, P. R., & Foster, J. (2010). Validation is like motor oil: Synthetic is better. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 305–328.Google Scholar
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hattrup, K. (1992). A disagreement about within-group agreement: Disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 161–167.Google Scholar
Milkovich, G., & Newman, J. (2007). Compensation (9th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Uniform Guidelines on Employment Selection Procedures. (1978). Federal Register, 43, 38290–38309.Google Scholar