Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T17:33:22.322Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Generalizability challenges in applied psychological and organizational research and practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2022

Brenton M. Wiernik Open the ORCID record for Brenton M. Wiernik [Opens in a new window] ,
Mukhunth Raghavan Open the ORCID record for Mukhunth Raghavan [Opens in a new window] ,
Tyler Allan Open the ORCID record for Tyler Allan [Opens in a new window]  and
Alex J. Denison Open the ORCID record for Alex J. Denison [Opens in a new window]
Brenton M. Wiernik
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL33620, USAwiernik@usf.edu, mukhunth@usf.edu, tylera1@usf.edu, adenison@usf.edu
Mukhunth Raghavan
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL33620, USAwiernik@usf.edu, mukhunth@usf.edu, tylera1@usf.edu, adenison@usf.edu
Tyler Allan
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL33620, USAwiernik@usf.edu, mukhunth@usf.edu, tylera1@usf.edu, adenison@usf.edu
Alex J. Denison
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL33620, USAwiernik@usf.edu, mukhunth@usf.edu, tylera1@usf.edu, adenison@usf.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Yarkoni highlights patterns of overgeneralization in psychology research. In this comment, we note that such challenges also pertain to applied psychological and organizational research and practice. We use two examples – cross-cultural generalizability and implicit bias training – to illustrate common practices of overgeneralization from narrow research samples to broader operational populations. We conclude with recommendations for research and practice.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 45 , 2022 , e38
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cheung, F. M., van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leong, F. T. L. (2011). Toward a new approach to the study of personality in culture. American Psychologist, 66(7), 593–603. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FitzGerald, C., Martin, A., Berner, D., & Hurst, S. (2019). Interventions designed to reduce implicit prejudices and implicit stereotypes in real world contexts: A systematic review. BMC Psychology, 7(1), 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-019-0299-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forscher, P. S., Lai, C. K., Axt, J. R., Ebersole, C. R., Herman, M., Devine, P. G., & Nosek, B. A. (2019). A meta-analysis of procedures to change implicit measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(3), 522–559. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000160CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelfand, M. J., Leslie, L. M., & Fehr, R. (2008). To prosper, organizational psychology should… adopt a global perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(4), 493–517. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oh, I.-S. (2009). The Five Factor Model of personality and job performance in East Asia: A cross-cultural validity generalization study. Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa. http://search.proquest.com/dissertations/docview/304903943/Google Scholar
Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Deller, J., Albrecht, A.-G., Duehr, E. E., & Paulus, F. M. (2012). Cross-cultural generalization: Using meta-analysis to test hypotheses about cultural variability. In Ryan, A. M., Leong, F. T. L. & Oswald, F. L. (Eds.), Conducting multinational research projects in organizational psychology: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 91–122). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10/5kzGoogle Scholar
Onyeador, I. N., Hudson, S. T. J., & Lewis, N. A. (2021). Moving beyond implicit bias training: Policy insights for increasing organizational diversity. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732220983840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oswald, F. L., Mitchell, G., Blanton, H., Jaccard, J., & Tetlock, P. E. (2015). Using the IAT to predict ethnic and racial discrimination: Small effect sizes of unknown societal significance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(4), 562–571. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000023CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pritlove, C., Juando-Prats, C., Ala-leppilampi, K., & Parsons, J. A. (2019). The good, the bad, and the ugly of implicit bias. The Lancet, 393(10171), 502–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32267-0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1977). Development of a general solution to the problem of validity generalization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(5), 529–540. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.62.5.529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Aarde, N., Meiring, D., & Wiernik, B. M. (2017). The validity of the Big Five personality traits for job performance: Meta-analyses of South African studies. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 25(3), 223–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12175CrossRefGoogle Scholar