Validity generalization and situational specificity: a second look at the 75% rule and Fisher's z transformation

Article Abstract:

In this article we analyzed the James, Demaree, and Mulaik (1986) critique of validity generalization. We demonstrated that the James et al. article (a) is not relevant to the real-world use of validity generalization in organizations, (b) has overlooked the bulk of the evidence against the situational specificity hypothesis and therefore, the substantive conclusion that the situational specificity hypothesis is 'alive and well' cannot be supported, and (c) has confused the process of hypothesis testing and parameter estimation in validity generalization and has made incorrect statements about the assumptions underlying both. In addition, (d) James et al.'s critique of the 75% rule is a statistical power argument and, as such, does not add to earlier statistical power studies; (e) the procedures for use of confidence intervals that they advocate are erroneous; (f) there is no double correction of artifacts in validity generalizations, as they contend; (g) the bias in the correlation (r) and the sampling error formula for r that they discuss is well-known, trivial in magnitude, and has no empirical significance; and (h) the use of the Fisher's z transformation of r in validity generalization studies and other meta-analyses (which they advocate) creates an unnecessary inflationary bias in estimates of true validities and provides no benefits. In light of these facts, we conclude that the James et al. substantive conclusions and methodological recommendations are seriously flawed. (Reprinted by the permission of the publisher.)

---

Validity generalization: rejoinder to Schmidt, Hunter, and Raju (1988)

Article Abstract:

A rejoinder to the Schmidt, Hunter, and Raju (1988) critique of James, Demaree, and Mulaik (1986) is presented. It is proposed that the recommendations offered by James et al. (1986) remain intact. These recommendations were that greater attention be given to alternative explanations of the results of validity generalization (VG) analyses, that the use of the 75% rule be discontinued, and that VG analyses be predicated on the Fisher z coefficients. In addition, the implication of low statistical power for interpreting results of a VG analysis is considered and the potential need for new mathematical models for VG is reviewed. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

---

An empirical comparison of the results of five validity generalization procedures

Article Abstract:

A comparison of five generalization procedures was made to determine validity. It found that all five produced similar results and will lead to the same statistical conclusions. The validity generalization procedures also function equally well with regard to correcting mean and variance coefficients.

Methods, Psychology, Applied, Applied psychology, Psychological research

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Refinements in validity generalization methods: implications for the situational specificity hypothesis. Problems and pitfalls in using capital budgeting and financial accounting techniques in assessing the utility of personnel programs
• Abstracts: An attributional analysis of resistance to group pressure regarding illicit drug and alcohol consumption. Use of labeling and assertions of dependency in appeals for consumer support
• Abstracts: All the right stuff: a comparison of female and male managers' career progression. On the road again: predicting the job transfer decision
• Abstracts: Influence of amount of job descriptive information on job analysis rating accuracy. Factors of union commitment: the case for a lower dimensionality

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.