This is a graduate level course. It will be taught in a seminar format; you carry a major responsibility for the conduct of the course. The class will focus upon the understanding of complex materials, communication of ideas, critical review of others' work, and integration of ideas and approaches. The majority of the time you will be asked to prepare and present summaries and critical reviews of others' professional writings. You will do this orally in class, through assigned papers, and by reviews and discussions of others' oral presentations. While one individual will have responsibility for an oral presentation in class, all students (and I) must be prepared by having read the text and the assigned readings and, thus, be prepared to comment on and discuss the materials. You must be prepared for every class.

Your grade for the class will be based on the following factors:

Each of these is discussed in detail below.

Appropriate readings will be assigned before your presentation. Guion’s (1998) Assessment Measurement and Prediction for Personnel Decisions will be the text. Each of you will select two papers, beyond the text assignments, to be used during your presentation. Papers will (generally) be from recent research and review journals. A selected list of readings/references is provided for your information. You need to get my OK for the papers you select and give the assignment to the class at least two weeks prior to your presentation. You will present a short summary of the papers, discuss strengths and weaknesses, and then lead a comprehensive discussion on the papers (see below for requirement for discussion questions). You will have an hour and a half for each paper. You will be judged on your ability to carry out each phase of the presentation; summary, critique, and discussion. The first two parts should last not more than one half of the time allotted with discussion taking up the last half. I will provide evaluations of your performance after each talk. (See the attached sheet for the Presentation Rating Sheet). The presentation rating sheets will be completed by both me and the students in the class.

While one individual is responsible for the oral presentation, each of you is to participate in the discussion. This means you must have read the appropriate readings and be prepared to participate during the discussion. I will provide a midyear evaluation and a final evaluation of your participation. To aid you in being prepared, each student will develop and submit to me and the presenter (typed) a short (1/4 to 1/2 page) discussion question based on the materials to be presented during a session. The presenters are to use some or all of the questions to stimulate discussion. This is to be done each session (except the first class). Both the quality of these questions and failing to submit a question will be used to determine the grade in this area. (See the attached sheet for the Class Participation Rating Sheet). The participation rating sheets will be completed by both me and the students in the class.

The paper will be based on your presentation. It will not exceed 25 pages of text (DOUBLE SPACED) and will be due at the end of the course. The paper is to be done in APA style and will follow the outline of the presentation plus an additional section; conclusions. I will provide you a review of the paper if it is given to me at least three weeks before the end of class (December 3, 1999). The paper will be judged both in terms of content and style (grammar, spelling, etc.). The paper will be graded as if it had been reviewed and received comments for you to use in revising the draft. I strongly recommend that you submit a draft for review.

Note: Plagiarism and cheating are serious offenses and may be punished by failure on the exam, paper or project, by failure in the course, and/or by expulsion from the University. For more relevant information, please consult the "Academic Dishonesty" policy printed in Inside KSU.

(Revised 9/10/99)

Ronald G. Downey, 226 Anderson Hall, Telephone - 532-5712. Please make arrangements to see me in my Anderson Office (just call and make an appointment)

All factors will be rated on a four point rating scale:

Borman, W.C., Hanson, M.A., & Hedge J.W. (1997). Personnel Selection. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 48: pp. 299-337.

Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Statistical Concepts for Test Theory. Introduction to Classical & Modern Test Theory.

Dunnette, M.D. (1983). Behaviors, Results, and Organizational Effectiveness: The Problem of Criteria. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, pp. 745-775.

Landy, F.J., & Shankster, L.J. (1994). Personnel selection and placement. Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 261-296.

Muchinsky, P.M. (1997). Psychology applied to work: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology (4th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.

Saal, F.E., & Knight, P.A. (1995). Industrial/organizational psychology: Science and practice (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.

Schmitt, N., Borman, W. C., & Associates (1993). Fairness In Selection Current Developments And Perspectives. Personnel Selection in Organizations, 171-202.

Dunlap, W.P., Chen, R., & Greer, T. (1994). Skew reduces test-retest reliability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 310-313.

Content Validity:

Tannenbaum, R.J., & Wesley, S. (1993). Agreement between committee-based and field-based job analyses: A study in the context of licensure testing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 975-980.

Criterion-Related Validity:

Ree, M.J., Carretta, T.R., Earles, J.A., & Albert, W. (1994). Sign changes when correcting for range restriction: A note on Pearson=s and Lawley=s selection formulas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 298-301.

Russell, C.J., Settoon, R.P., McGrath, R.N., Blanton, A.E., Kidwell, R.E., Lohrke, F.T., Scifres, E.L., & Danforth, G.W. (1994). Investigator characteristics as moderators of personnel selection research: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 163-170.

Sackett, P.R., & Ostgaard, D.J. (1994). Job-specific applicant pools and national norms for cognitive ability tests: Implications for range restriction corrections in validation research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 680-684.

Moderator Variables:

Stone-Romero, E.F., & Anderson, L.E. (1994). Relative power of moderated multiple regression and the comparison of subgroup correlation coefficients for detecting moderating effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 354-359.

Hudson, J. P., Jr., & Campion, J.E. (1994). Hingsight bias in an application of the Angoff method for setting cutoff scores. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 860-865.

Murphy, K.R. (1994). Potential effects of banding as a function of test reliability. Personnel Psychology, 47, 477-495.

Murphy, K.R., Osten, K., & Myors, B. (1995). Modeling the effects of banding in personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 48, 61-84.

Intelligence/Aptitude Tests:

Olea, M.M., & Ree, M.J. (1994). Predicting pilot and navigator criteria: Not much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 845-851.

Ree, M.J., Earles, J.A., & Teachout, M.S. (1994). Predicting job performance: Not much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 518-524.

Sidick, J.T., Barrett, G.V., & Doverspike, D. (1994). Three-alternative multiple choice tests: An attractive option. Personnel Psychology, 47, 829-835.

Motivation Tests:

Villanova, P., Bernardin, H.J., Johnson, D.L., & Dahmus, S.A. (1994). The validity of a measure of job compatibility in the prediction of job performance and turnover of motion picture theater personnel. Personnel Psychology, 47, 73-90.

Personality Tests:

Bernardin, H.J., & Cooke, D.K. (1993). Validity of an honesty test in predicting theft among convenience store employees. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1097-1108.

Christiansen, N.D., Goffin, R.D., Johnston, N.G., & Rothstein, M.G. (1994). Correcting the 16PF for faking: Effects on criterion-related validity and individual hiring decisions. Personnel Psychology, 47, 847-860.

Cunningham, M.R., Wong, D.T., & Barbee, A.P. (1994). Self-presentation dynamics on overt integrity tests: Experimental studies of the Reid Report. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 643-658.

Guthrie, J.P., Ash, R.A., & Bendapudi, V. (1995). Additional validity evidence for a measure of morningness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 186-190.

Kelly, P.L., Jacobs, R.R., & Farr, J.L. (1994). Effects of multiple administrations of the MMPI for employee screening. Personnel Psychology, 47, 575-591.

Mount, M.K., Barrick, M.R., & Strauss, J.P. (1994). Validity of observer ratings of the big five personality factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 272-280.

Ones, D.S., Mount, M.K., Barrick, M.R., & Hunter, J.E. (1994). Personality and job

performance: A critique of the Tett, Jackson, and Rothstein (1991) meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 47, 147-156.

Ones, D.S., Viswesvaran, C., & Schmidt, F.L. (1993). Comprehensive meta-analysis of integrity test validities: Findings and implications for personnel selection and theories of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology [Monograph], 78, 679-703.

Rosse, J.G., Miller, J.L., & Stecher, M.D. (1994). A field study of job applicants= reactions of personality and cognitive ability testing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 987-992.

Schmit, M.J., & Ryan, A.M. (1993). The big five in personnel selection: Factor structure in applicant and nonapplicant populations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 966-974.

Tett, R.P., Jackson, D.N., Rothstein, M., & Reddon, J.R. (1994). Meta-analysis of personality- job performance relations: A reply to Ones, Mount, Barrick, and Hunter (1994). Personnel Psychology, 47, 157-172.

Scholarios, D.M., Johnson, C.D., & Zeidner, J. (1994). Selecting predictors for maximizing the classification efficiency of a battery. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 412-

Vevea, J.L., Clements, N.C., & Hedges, L.V. (1993). Assessing the effects of selection bias on validity data for the General Aptitude Test Battery. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 981-987.

Mead, A.D., & Drasgow, F. (1993). Equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil

cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 449-458.

Van de Vijver, F.J.R., & Harsveld, M. (1994). The incomplete equivalence of the paper-and-pencil and computerized versions of the General Aptitude Test Battery. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 852-859.

Blakeley, B.R., Quinones, M.A., Crawford, M.S., & Jago, I.A. (1994). The validity of isometric strength tests. Personnel Psychology, 47, 247-274.

Brown, B.K., & Campion, M.A. (1994). Biodata phenomenology: Recruiters= perceptions and use of biographical information in resume screening. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 897-908.

Kluger, A.N., & Colella, A. (1993). Beyond the mean bias: The effects of warning against faking on biodata item variances. Personnel Psychology, 46, 763-780.

Mael, F.A., & Hirsch, A.C. (1993). Rainforest empiricism and quasi-rationality: Two approaches to objective biodata. Personnel Psychology, 46, 719-738.

Stokes, G.S., Hogan, J.B., & Snell, A.F. (1993). Comparability of incumbent and applicant samples for the development of biodata keys: The influence of social desirability. Personnel Psychology, 46, 739-762.

Tepper, B.J. (1994). Investigation of general and program-specific attitudes toward corporate drug-testing policies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 392-401.

Adkins, C.L., Russell, C.J., & Werbel, J.D. (1994). Judgments of fit in the selection process: The role of work value congruence. Personnel Psychology, 47, 605-623.

Campion, M.A., Campion, J.E., & Hudson, J.P., Jr. (1994). Structured interviewing: A note on incremental validity and alternative question types. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 998-1002.

Dalessio, A.T., & Silverhart, T.A. (1994). Combining biodata test and interview informantion: Predicting decisions and performance criteria. Personnel Psychology, 47, 303-315.

Dougherty, T.W., Turban, D.B., & Callender, J.C. (1994). Confirming first impressions in the employment interview: A field study of interviewer behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 184-190.

Highhouse, S., & Bottrill, K.V. (1995). The influence of social (mis)information on memory for behavior in an employment interview. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 220-229.

Huffcutt, A.I., & Arthur, W., Jr. (1994). Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry-level jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 184-190.

Mantwill, M., Kohnken, G., & Aschermann, E. (1995). Effects of the cognitive interview on the recall of familiar and unfamiliar events. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 68-78.

McDaniel, M.A., Whetzel, D.L., Schmidt, F.L., & Maurer, S.D. (1994). The validity of

employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 599-616.

Motowidlo, S.J., & Burnett, J.R. (1995). Aural and visual sources of validity in structured employment interviews. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 61, 239-249.

Pingitore, R., Dugoni, B.L., Tindale, R.S., & Spring, B. (1994). Bias against overweight job applicants in a simulated employment interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 908-917.

Highhouse, S., & Hause, E.L. (1995). Missing information in selection: An application of the Einhorn-Hogarth ambiguity model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 86-93.

Jagacinski, C.M. (1995). Distinguishing adding and averaging models in a personnel selection task: When missing information matters. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 61, 1-15.

Roth, P.L. (1994). Missing data: A conceptual review for applied psychologists. Personnel Psychology, 47, 537-560.

Hanisch, K.A., & Hulin, C.L. (1994). Two-stage sequential selection procedures using ability and training performance: Incremental validity of behavioral consistency measures. Personnel Psychology, 47, 767-785.

Meglino, B.M., DeNisi, A.S., & Ravlin, E.C. (1993). Effects of previous job exposure and subsequent job status on the functioning of a realistic job preview. Personnel Psychology, 46, 803-822.

Campbell, R.J., & Bray, D.W. (1993). Use of an assessment center as an aid in management selection. Personnel Psychology, 46, 691-699.

Harris, M.M., Becker, A.S., & Smith, D.E. (1993). Does the assessment center scoring method affect the cross-situational consistency of ratings? Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 675-678.

Joyce, L.W., Thayer, P.W., & Pond, S.B., III. (1994). Managerial functions: An alternative to traditional assessment center dimensions? Personnel Psychology, 47, 109-121.

Kleinmann, M. (1993). Are rating dimensions in assessment canters transparent for participants? Consequences for criterion and construct validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 988-993.

Macan, T.H., Avedon, M.J., Paese, M., & Smith, D.E. (1994). The effects of applicants= reactions to cognitive ability tests and an assessment center. Personnel Psychology, 47, 715-738.

Barber, A.E., Hollenbeck, J.R., Tower, S.L., & Phillips, J.M. (1994). The effects of interview focus on recruitment effectiveness: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 886-896.

Barber, A.E., & Roehling, M.V. (1993). Job postings and the decision to interview: A verbal protocol analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 845-856.

Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (1994). Estimation of sampling error variance in the meta-analysis of correlations: Use of average correlation in the homogeneous case. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79,171-177.

Johnson, B.T., Mullen, B., & Salas, E. (1995). Comparison of three major meta-analytic approaches. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 94-106.

Koslowsky, M., & Sagie, A. (1994). Components of artifactual variance in meta-analytic research. Personnel Psychology, 47, 561-574.

Law, K.S., Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. (1994). A test of two refinements in procedures for meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 978-986.

Law, K.S., Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. (1994). Nonlinearity of range corrections in meta-analysis: Test of an improved procedure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 425-438.

Sagie, A., & Koslowsky, M. (1993). Detecting moderators with meta-analysis: An evaluation and comparison of techniques. Personnel Psychology, 46, 629-640.

De Corte, W. (1994). Utility analysis for the one-cohort selection-retention decision with a probationary period. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79,402-411.

Judiesch, M.K., Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. (1993). Has the problem of judgement in utility analysis been solved? Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 903-911.

Latham, G.P., & Whyte, G. (1994). The futility of utility analysis. Personnel Psychology, 47, 31-46.

Law, K.S., & Myors, B. (1993). Cutoff scores that maximize the total utility of a selection program: Comment of martin and Raju=s (1992) procedure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 736-740.

Martin, S.L., & Terris, W. (1994). Reemphasizing Martin and Terris=s (1991a) APredicting infrequent behavior: Clarifying the impact on false-positive rates.@ Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 302-305.

Raju, N.S., Burke, M.J., & Maurer, T.J. (1995). A note on direct range restriction corrections in utility analysis. Personnel Psychology, 48, 143-149.

Raju, N.S., Burke, M.J., Normand, J., & Lezotte, D.V. (1993). What would be if what is wasn=t? Rejoinder to Judiesch, Schmidt, and Hunter (1993). Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 912-916.

Russell, C.J., Colella, A., & Bobko, P. (1993). Expanding the context of utility: The strategic impact of personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 46, 781-801.

Love, K.G., Bishop, R.C., Heinisch, D.A., & Montei, M.S. (1994). Selection across two cultures: Adapting the selection of American assemblers to meet Japanese job performance demands. Personnel Psychology, 47, 837-846.

Gilliland, S.W. (1993). The perceived fairness of selection systems: An organizational justice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 18, 694-734.

Gilliland, S.W. (1994). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to a selection system. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 691-701.

Graves, L.M., & Powell, G.N. (1995). The effect of sex similarity on recruiters= evaluations of actual applicants: A test of the similarity-attraction paradigm. Personnel Psychology, 48, 85-98.

Hall, F.S., & Hall, E.L. (1994). The ADA: Going beyond the law. Academy of Management Executive, 8, 17-32.

Heilman, M.E., Kaplow, S.R., Amato, M.A.G., & Stathatos, P. (1993). When similarity is a liability: Effects of sex-based preferential selection on reactions to like-sex and different-sex others. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 917-927.

Kravitz, D.A., & Platania, J. (1993). Attitudes and beliefs about affirmative action: Effects of target and of respondent sex and ethnicity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 928-938.

Lefkowitz, J. (1994). Race as a factor in job placement: Serendipitous findings of Aethnic drift.@ Personnel Psychology, 79, 497-513.

McRae, M.B. (1994). Influence of sex role stereotypes on personnel decisions of black managers. Journel of Applied Psychology, 79, 306-309.

Perry, E.L., Davis-Blake, A., & Kulik, C.T. (1994). Explaining gender-based selection decisions: A synthesis of contextual and cognitive approaches. Academy of Management Review, 19, 786-820.

Powell, G.N., & Butterfield, D.A. (1994). Investigating the Aglass ceiling@ phenomenon: An empirical study of actual promotions to top management. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 68-86.

Silva, J.M., & Jacobs, R.R. (1993). Performance as a function of increased minority hiring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 591-601.