Progress in psychometrics: Can industrial and organizational psychology catch up?

Personnel Psychology

Volumn 53, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 913-924

  Murphy, Kevin R ^a   De Shon, Richard ^b  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347110839     PISSN: 00315826     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.tb02423.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. American Psychological Association. (1954). Technical Recommendations for psychological tests and diagnostic techniques. Washington, DC: Author.
2. Cronbach LJ, Gleser GC, Nanda H, Rajaratnam N. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. New York: Wiley.
3. Cronbach LJ, Rajaratnam N, Gleser GC. (1965). Theory of generalizability: A liberalization of reliability theory. The British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 16, 137-163.
4. DeShon RP. (1998). A cautionary note on measurement error corrections in structural equation models. Psychological Methods, 3, 412-423.
5. Drasgow F, Hulin CL. (1991). Item response theory. In Dunnette M, Hough L (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 2nd ed. (Vol. 1, pp. 577-636). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
6. Hoyt WT. (2000). Rater bias in psychological research: When it is a problem and what can we do about it? Psychological Methods, 5, 64-86.
7. Hulin CL, Drasgow F, Parsons CK. (1983). Item response theory: Application to psychological measurement. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.
8. Hunter JE Schmidt FL. (1983). Quantifying the effects of psychological interventions on employee job performance and work-force productivity. American Psychologist, 38, 473-478.
9. Landy FJ. (1986). Stamp collecting versus science: Validation as hypothesis testing. American Psychologist, 41, 1183-1192.
10. Lord FM. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Lord FM, Novick MR. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
12. Lumsden J. (1976). Test theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 27, 251-280.
13. McDonald RP. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Mislevy RJ. (1993). Foundations of a new test theory. In Frederiksen N, Mislevy R, Bejar I (Eds.), Test theory for a new generation of tests (pp. 19-40). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Murphy K, Davidshofer C. (2000). Psychological testing: Principles and applications (5th ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
16. Murphy K, DeShon R. (2000). Interrater correlations do not estimate the reliability of job performance ratings. PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 53, 873-900.
17. Novick MR. (1966). The axioms and principal results of classical test theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 3, 1-18.
18. Schmidt FL, Hunter JE. (1996). Measurement error in psychological research: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1, 199-223.
19. Schmidt FL, Hunter JE. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in industrial and organizational psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274.
20. Schmidt FL, Hunter JE, Outerbridge AN, Trattner MH. (1986). The economic impact of job selection methods on size, productivity, and payroll costs of the federal work force: An empirically based demonstration. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9, 1-29.
21. Schmidt FL, Viswesvaran C, Ones DS. (2000). Reliability is not validity and validity is not reliability. PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 53, 901-912.
22. Standards for educational and psychological testing. (1985). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
23. Standards for educational and psychological testing. (1999). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
24. Thissen D. (1993). Repealing rules that no longer apply to psychological measurement. In Frederiksen N, Mislevy R, Bejar I (Eds.), Test theory for a new generation of tests (pp. 79-98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Viswesvaran C, Ones DS, Schmidt FL. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 557-574.