Article contents
What Is Wrong With Turnover Research? Commentary on Russell's Critique
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 January 2015
Extract
Dr. Russell (2013) provocatively critiqued turnover research, expressing a sentiment that we share—namely, the lamentable modest predictability of turnover. All the same, we disagree with certain criticisms of turnover theory, methodology, and practicality. We organize our reactions into sections: predictive validity for the standard turnover criterion; other criteria for model evaluation; incremental validity controlling quit intentions; Russell's proposed methodology, the potential biases of the Russell and Van Sell (2012) test; and an alternate approach by Hom, Mitchell, Lee, and Griffeth (2012).
- Type
- Commentaries
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2013
References
- 3
- Cited by