The Congruence Myth: An Analysis of the Efficacy of the Person-Environment Fit Model.
By Howard E. A. Tinsley. 2000
309 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Applied Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/099566027062df23d1db1a3fd03dfb7ceffbff13
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Applied Psychology
- S. Carless
- J. Edwards
- Reeshad S. Dalal
- Chao Mao
- Margaret M. Nauta
- P. A. Gore
- K. Verschueren
- Yu-Ping Peng
In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
- Aharon Tziner
- Reeshad S. Dalal
- J. Edwards
- Gordon W. Cheung
- Rustin D. Meyer
- Richard Hermida
- S. Robbins
- Orit Tsabari
Citations in the corpus
- Ten Difference Score Myths (2001, methodology): “The use of product terms as a substitute for difference scores is alluring, given that product terms analyzed hierarchically capture the interaction between two variables (Cohen, 1978), and the terms interaction and fit often have been used jointly, if not interchangeably, in congruence research (Ch”
- Introducing the Latent Congruence Model for Improving the Assessment of Similarity, Agreement, and Fit in Organizational Research (2009, background): “Finally, the issue of measurement equivalence is rarely (if ever) addressed in the discussions of difference scores or PSIs.”
- Person–Environment Congruence and Holland's Theory: A Review and Reconsideration (2000, unknown): “The choice of a congruence index in a correlational study substantially affects the outcome of the study (Assouline & Meir, 1987; Meir & Tzadok, 2000; Tinsley, 2000).”
- Person-Environment Fit and Public Service Motivation (2008, background): “…and Wright-Isak 1982, 241) and by many studies within organizational psychology about the need for a person-environment (P-E) fit (Kristof 1996; Tinsley 2000; Verquer, Beehr, and Wagner 2003; Hoffman and Woehr 2006; Kristof-Brown et al. 2005), that is a fit between a person and the…”
- Person-job fit versus person-organization fit as predictors of organizational attraction and job acceptance intentions : A longitudinal study (2005, background): “Extensive research supports the proposition that individuals are satisfied with and adjust most easily to jobs that are congruent with their own career-relevant personality types (Spokane, 1985; Tinsley, 2000).”
- High school students' career decision-making process: Consequences for choice implementation in higher education (2007, background): “…have been suggested, including choice actualization, choice satisfaction, adjustment in the chosen option, performance in the chosen option, and choice stability (Brisbin & Savickas, 1994; Gati & Asher, 2001; Harren, 1979; Janis & Mann, 1977; Stumpf et al., 1983; Taborsky, 1994; Tinsley, 2000).”
- Updated Meta-Analysis on the Relationship Between Congruence and Satisfaction (2005, background): “Drawing on the research literature, Tinsley (2000) contended that although the person-environment fit model provides a valid and useful way of thinking about the interaction between the individual and the environment, the hexagonal congruence typology and satisfaction do not correlate significantly.”
- Predicting Occupational Considerations: A Comparison of Self-Efficacy Beliefs, Outcome Expectations, and Person-Environment Congruence (2000, background): “Several researchers have noted the lackluster performance of congruence in predicting important career outcome variables (Swanson & Gore, 2000; Tinsley, 2000) and some (Tinsley, 2000) have challenged researchers to begin to look for competing or complimentary variables that”
- Predicting Engineering Major Status From Mathematics Achievement and Interest Congruence (2004, background): “A great deal of research has examined congruence in relation to numerous voca- tional outcomes (for reviews, see Spokane, 1985; Spokane, Meir, & Catalano, 2000; Tinsley, 2000).”