Principles of Industrial and Organizational Psychology
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Principles of Industrial and Organizational Psychology
LITERATURE REVIEW RESOURCES 1
LITERATURE REVIEW RESOURCES 10
Principles of Industrial and Organizational Psychology
PSY-830 Literature Review Resources
Number Article Information Added to RefWorks? (Y or N)
1. Reference Information Industrial/Organizational Psychology: Understanding the Workplace
Y Link https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edswss&AN=000347729700002&site=eds-live&scope=site
Annotation Morris, S. B., Daisley, R. L., Wheeler, M., & Boyer, P. (2015). A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Individual Assessments and Job Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(1), 5-20. doi: 10.1037/a0036938.
In this examined scholarly journal research article, the authors Morris, S. B., Daisley, R. L., Wheeler, M., & Boyer, P.; analyzes the related validity criterion used in individual assessment. They defined individual assessments as a process used in selecting employees, and involving the utilization of different assessment methods, administered on each candidate interviewed, and using such assessment to evaluate, judge, and determine a candidate’s overall suitability for a position. The authors determined that the recommendations of the assessor are reliable enough to predict work performances; however, they mutually agree that the results must be characterized, explained and interpreted in a cautious manner, due to the fact that a relative small number of studies have been conducted and to take into consideration the possibilities of publication biases.
2. Reference Information In Support of Personality Assessment in Organizational Settings
Y Link https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2007-18089-008&site=eds-live&scope=site
Annotation Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Judge, T. A. (2007). In support of personality assessment in organizational settings. Personnel Psychology, 60(4), 995-1027. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00099.x
The authors, Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Judge, T. A. in this scholarly journal research article examined the idea of using personality tests for employees’ selection purposes. They used various meta-analyses including those used by Morgeson et al. (2007), such as the optimum and unit-weighted different correlations among the Big Five personality dimensions and behaviors in organizations, including job performance; (b) generalized variable relationships of Conscientiousness and its surfaces such as dependability and cautiousness achievement orientation; (c) the validity of compound personality measures; and (d) the validity of incremental personality measures versus cognitive ability. The authors concluded that it is counterproductive to write off all the areas of expertise of individual differences as it relates to personality with reference to staff selection and organizational decision making for the science and practice of I-O psychology.
3. Reference Information Standards for Organizational Consultation Assessment and Evaluation Instruments
Y Link https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hch&AN=9308177189&site=eds-live&scope=site
Annotation Cooper, S. E., & O’Connor Jr., R. (1993). Standards for organizational consultation assessment and evaluation instruments. Journal of Counseling & Development, 71(6), 651-660.
The authors addressed the major quantitative and qualitative psychometric guidelines for managerial/directional and organizational deliberation and consultation assessment as well as evaluation instruments. They also reviewed a framework of several current sampling questions as well as possible implications of the instrument used by practitioners and suggested that further research and assessments that focuses on compliance, performance, design, adequacy, efficiency, management, intervention, and impact should be conducted.
4. Reference Information Do you understand why stars twinkle? Would you rather read than watch TV? Do you trust data more than your instincts?
N Link https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ulh&AN=103175128&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Annotation Gray, E., & Nathan, G. (2015). Do you understand why stars twinkle? would you rather read than watch TV? do you trust data more than your instincts? (cover story). Time, 185(23), 40-46.
In this article, Gray, E., & Nathan, G. (2015), discusses personality tests and various similar questions relating to job applicants’ requirements of answers so as to get selected in the 2015 era of increased hiring. They also analyzed employment qualifications and interview criteria, in addition to efforts of combating the staff turnover rates and efforts at increasing labor productivity in the US. The authors made references to Hogan Personality Inventory test and the Prophecy Behavioral Personality Assessment in addition to executive Andy Biga and the monitoring of workers’ temperaments.
5. Reference Information Employability and Career Success: Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Reality.
Y Link http://www.drtomascp.com/uploads/PIOP_final_employability.pdf
Annotation Hogan, R., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Kaiser, R. B. (2013). Employability and career success: Bridging the gap between theory and reality. Industrial & Organizational Psychology, 6(1), 3-16. doi: 10.1111/iops.12001.
These authors of this article review the prevalence in the commonly accepted research mental outlook towards employability, and the study towards career achievement, wherein the believes of psychologist is driven by cognitive potentials, personality, and educational success. In addition, the article examines the needs of employees’ in their workplaces, which features the major gains in social skills that supports the drives in determining the level of employability. They also analyzed the rationale behind unemployment and came to the conclusion that financial instability and other associated mental characteristics in conjunction with employability are essential parts of the difficulty that leads joblessness. The authors establish that industrial-organizational psychologist must be independently paired so as to contribute to preparation of explanations that supports employability.
6. Reference Information The Importance of Ability and Effort in Recruiters’ Hirability Decisions: An Empirical Examination of Attribution Theory
N Link https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=83512570&site=eds-live&scope=site
Annotation Carless, S., & Waterworth, R. (2012). The importance of ability and effort in recruiters’ hirability decisions: An empirical examination of attribution theory. Australian Psychologist, 47(4), 232-237. 10.1111/j.1742-9544.2011. 00038.x
These authors analyzed Weiner’s attribution theory in determining the attributions that recruiters utilize during interviews and selection processes as well as final hiring decisions. They used a quasi-experimental design to determine at which level of ability (either high or low) as well as effort (high or low) was manipulated. They analyzed the extent at which there were manipulations using three outcomes that includes: (1) beliefs and predictions of employees’ future job performances, (2) anticipated level of employees’ responsibility for lack of success and deficiencies, and (3) hiring recommendations. Their findings compatible to that of the attribution theory wherein recruiters discovered the dissimilarities in the element and explanations of prior work outcomes provided by job applicants that later affected their expectations of future performances on the job, responsibility in lack of success, and recommendations to hire.
7. Reference Information The Structured Employment Interview: Narrative and Quantitative Review of the Research Literature.
Y Link https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=94280024&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Annotation Levashina, J., Hartwell, C., Morgeson, F., & Campion, M. (2014). The structured employment interview: Narrative and quantitative review of the research literature. Personnel Psychology, 67, 241-293. doi: 10.1111/peps.12052
This article investigated the common argument regarding employment structure that has grown for over two decades. It analyzed a complied and well-structured devised plan of empirical research. The authors Levashina, J., Hartwell, C., Morgeson, F., & Campion, M. (2014) focus their attention and argument on a few major subjects that have been the f focal point on (a) the characterization of structure; (b) decreasing team disparities in dialogue ratings via structure; (c) impact organization in thoughtful reflection dialogues; (d) measurable personality through designed interviews; (e) contradicting situational analysis as opposing to past-behavior questions; (f) developing rating scales; (g) follow-up, and explanation on question; and (h) responses to structure. Each of this topic was used to evaluate and augment methods of meta-analysis, content analysis, and primary studies. In particular, the authors concluded that interviewees used multiple unwritten approaches such as assertive tactics to vigorously communicate positive images.
8. Reference Information Increasing Performance Appraisal Effectiveness: Matching Task Types, Appraisal Process, and Rater Training
Y Link https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=4278235&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Annotation Lee, C. (1985). Increasing performance appraisal effectiveness: Matching task types, appraisal process, and rater training. Academy of Management Review, 10, 322-331.
This research study proposes a performance appraisal technique that focuses on fitting ratee task characteristics. The author’s approach comprises of systems that are designed with dealing with tasks that consists of both suitability of predictable and genuine performance measures and knowledge of the change management process, either high or low, but designed to boost and develop the connection between accuracy in observations and accuracy in performance ratings as well as improving ratees’ future performances. The author also examine types of task and performance appraisal techniques, including strategies used in training raters to expand observational accuracy.
9. Reference Information Overlooking Overkill? Beyond the 1-to-5 Rating Scale
Y Link https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=18585626&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Annotation Kaiser, R. B., & Kaplan, R. (2005). Overlooking overkill? Beyond the 1-to-5 rating scale. Human Resource Planning, 28(3), 7-11.
The authors of this scholarly article discuss the techniques used for measuring performance in organizations. Their selected choice is the behavioral rating scale, and the commonly used one is the frequency type of response scale. This format requires that raters demonstrate how frequent a manager or leader exhibits specific type of behavior. Another type of response scale that is used is the evaluation type, wherein the rater is asked to determine the effectiveness of the manager’s performance including his or her behavior, role, or function as described in the survey item. The authors concluded that the major difference between frequency and evaluation response scales is that frequency engages raters to describe performance while evaluation response requires that raters determine the quality of performance.
10. Reference Information The Relative Importance of Task and Contextual Performance Dimensions to Supervisor Judgments of Overall Performance
N Link https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=12128489&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Annotation Johnson, J. W. (2001). The relative importance of task and contextual performance dimensions to supervisor judgments of overall performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 984-996.
In this article, the author argues that while evidence backs and upholds the exclusive inputs of task and contextual performances to overall evaluations, there is however, limited information available on the contributions that unique dimensions of contextual performance make to the general performance judgments. The article also analyzed and evaluated the scope and length that supervisors will go to determine task and contextual performances through the use of relative weights to statistically interpret the comparative significance of distinct dimensions of all the types of performance to the general performance ratings.
References
Carless, S., & Waterworth, R. (2012). The importance of ability and effort in recruiters’ hirability decisions: An empirical examination of attribution theory. Australian Psychologist, 47(4), 232-237. 10.1111/j.1742-9544.2011. 00038.x Retrieved from
Cooper, S. E., & O’Connor Jr., R. (1993). Standards for organizational consultation assessment and evaluation instruments. Journal of Counseling & Development, 71(6), 651-660. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hch&AN=9308177189&site=eds-live&scope=site
Gray, E., & Nathan, G. (2015). Do you understand why stars twinkle? would you rather read than watch TV? do you trust data more than your instincts? (cover story). Time, 185(23), 40-46. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ulh&AN=103175128&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Hogan, R., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Kaiser, R. B. (2013). Employability and career success: Bridging the gap between theory and reality. Industrial & Organizational Psychology, 6(1), 3-16. doi: 10.1111/iops.12001. Retrieved from http://www.drtomascp.com/uploads/PIOP_final_employability.pdf
Johnson, J. W. (2001). The relative importance of task and contextual performance dimensions to supervisor judgments of overall performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 984-996. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=12128489&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Kaiser, R. B., & Kaplan, R. (2005). Overlooking overkill? Beyond the 1-to-5 rating scale. Human Resource Planning, 28(3), 7-11. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=18585626&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Lee, C. (1985). Increasing performance appraisal effectiveness: Matching task types, appraisal process, and rater training. Academy of Management Review, 10, 322-331. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=4278235&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Levashina, J., Hartwell, C., Morgeson, F., & Campion, M. (2014). The structured employment interview: Narrative and quantitative review of the research literature. Personnel Psychology, 67, 241-293. doi: 10.1111/peps.12052. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=94280024&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Morris, S. B., Daisley, R. L., Wheeler, M., & Boyer, P. (2015). A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Individual Assessments and Job Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(1), 5-20. doi: 10.1037/a0036938. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edswss&AN=000347729700002&site=eds-live&scope=site
Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Judge, T. A. (2007). In support of personality assessment in organizational settings. Personnel Psychology, 60(4), 995-1027. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00099.x Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2007-18089-008&site=eds-live&scope=site
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!