Developing a procedure to correct for range restriction that involves both institutional selection and applicants' rejection of job offers

Organizational Research Methods

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 442-455

  Yang, Hyuckseung ^a,d   Sackett, Paul R ^b   Nho, Yongjin ^c  

^a Yonsei University   (South Korea)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^c Seoul National University of Science and Technology   (South Korea)

^d Department of Innovation and Entrepreneurial Marketing   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Non ignorable selection process; Population correlation; Range restriction; Validation study

Indexed keywords

EID: 4944265688     PISSN: 10944281     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1094428104269054     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Aitken, A. C. (1934). Note on selection from a multivariate normal population. Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathematical Society, 4, 106-110.
2. Alexander, R. A., Barrett, G. V., Alliger, G. M., & Carson, K. P. (1986). Towards a general model of non-random sampling and the impact on population correlation: Generalizations of Berkson's fallacy and restriction of range. British Journal of Mathmatical and Statistical Psychology, 39, 90-105.
3. Bobko, P. (1983). An analysis of correlations corrected for attenuation and range restriction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 584-589.
4. Dunbar, S. B., & Linn, R. L. (1991). Range restriction adjustments in the prediction of military Job performance. In A. K. Wigdor & B. F. Green Jr. (Eds.), Performance assessment for the workplace, II (pp. 127-157). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
5. Greene, W. H. (1993). Econometric analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
6. Greene, W. H. (1998). LIMDEP user's version 7.0 manual (Rev. ed.). New York: Econometric Software.
7. Gross, A. L. (1990). A maximum likelihood approach to test validation with missing and censored dependent variables. Psychometrika, 55, 533-549.
8. Gross, A. L., & McGanney, M. L. (1987). The restriction of range problem and non-ignorable selection processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 604-610.
9. Heckman, J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 47, 153-161.
10. Judge, G. G., Hill, R. C., Griffiths, W. E., Lutkepohl, H., & Lee, T. (1988). Introduction to the theory and practice of econometrics (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley.
11. Lawley, D. N. (1943). A note on Karl Pearson's selection formulae. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 62(1), 28-30.
12. Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: John Wiley.
13. Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
14. Maddala, G. S. (1983). Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge, MA: Econometric Society Monographs.
15. Mendoza, J. L. (1993). Fisher transformations for correlations corrected for selection and missing data. Psychometrika, 58, 601-615.
16. Olson, C. A., & Becker, B. E. (1983). A proposed technique for the treatment of restriction of range in selection validation. Psychological Bulletin, 93, 137-148.
17. Pearson, K. (1903). Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution - XI: On the influence of natural selection on the variability and correlation of organs. Philosophical Transactions, CC.-A., 321, 1-66.
18. Rubin, D. B. (1976). Inference and missing data. Biometrika, 63, 581-592.
19. Sackett, P. R., & Yang, H. (2000). Correction for range restriction: An expanded typology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 112-118.
20. Thorndike, R. L. (1949). Personnel selection: Test and measurement techniques. New York: John Wiley.
21. U.S. Department of Labor. (1989). Human resource policies and practices in American firms. Washington, DC: Author.