Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:30:18.174Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Importance of Sample Composition Depends on the Research Question

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2016

Michael A. Gillespie ,
Jennifer Z. Gillespie ,
Michelle H. Brodke  and
William K. Balzer
Michael A. Gillespie*
Affiliation:
College of Arts and Sciences, University of South Florida, Sarasota–Manatee
Jennifer Z. Gillespie
Affiliation:
College of Arts and Sciences, University of South Florida, Sarasota–Manatee
Michelle H. Brodke
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Sciences, Bowling Green State University, Firelands
William K. Balzer
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michael A. Gillespie, College of Arts and Sciences, University of South Florida, Sarasota–Manatee, 8350 North Tamiami Trail, SMC, B216, Sarasota, FL 34243. E-mail: magillespie@sar.usf.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Bergman and Jean (2016) compare published industrial and organizational (I-O) literature with labor statistics, demonstrating an underrepresentation of “workers” (i.e., “wage earners, laborers, first-line personnel, freelancers, contract workers”) relative to managerial, professional, and executive positions. They note that one of four ways in which worker underrepresentation undermines the utility of I-O psychology research is that we could miss the role of worker status as a main effect on important variables and/or a moderator of key relationships, which could hinder understanding of important phenomena as they relate to workers. We applaud the emphasis on workers and agree with this basic premise.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 207 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2016 

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

Bergman, M. E., & Jean, V. A. (2016). Where have all the “workers” gone? A critical analysis of the unrepresentativeness of our samples relative to the labor market in the industrial–organizational psychology literature. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 9, 84–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crossley, C. D., Grauer, E., Lin, L. F., & Stanton, J. M. (2002, April). Assessing the content validity of intention to quit scales. Paper presented at the 17th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160.Google Scholar
Gillespie, M. A., Balzer, W. K., Brodke, M. H., Garza, M., Gerbec, E. N., Gillespie, J. Z.,. . . Yugo, J. E. (in press). Normative measurement of job satisfaction in the US. Journal of Managerial Psychology.Google Scholar
Guion, R. M. (2011). Assessment, measurement, and prediction for personnel decisions. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Highhouse, S., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2009). Do samples really matter that much? In Lance, C. & Vandenberg, R. (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 247–265). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ironson, G. H., Smith, P. C., Brannick, M. T., Gibson, W. M., & Paul, K. B. (1989). Construction of a job in general scale: A comparison of global, composite and specific measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 1–8.Google Scholar
Parra, L. F. (1995). Trust in management and job satisfaction as predictors of turnover intention. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio.Google Scholar
Robie, C., Ryan, A. M., Schmieder, R. A., Parra, L. F., & Smith, P. C. (1998). The relation between job level and job satisfaction. Group & Organization Management, 23, 470–495.Google Scholar
Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. C. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in work and retirement: A strategy for the study of attitudes. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Yankelevich, M., Broadfoot, A., Gillespie, J. Z., Gillespie, M. A., & Guidroz, A. M. (2012). The Stress in General Scale revisited: A one-factor structure. Stress & Health, 28, 137–148.Google Scholar