Increasing the Accuracy of Corrections for Range Restriction: Implications for Selection Procedure Validities and Other Research Results

By Frank L. Schmidt, In-Sue Oh, Huy Le. 2006

106 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/64041d05d18f3f0dca099ae78705d10710c3d710

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

1. Robert A. Terry
2. Filip Lievens
3. Neal Schmitt
4. P. Sackett
5. A. Sundström
6. M. Wiberg
7. Sucheta Nadkarni
8. Jorge Mendoza

Citations in the corpus

• It’s about Time! CEOs’ Temporal Dispositions, Temporal Leadership, and Corporate Entrepreneurship (2017, background): “Such a restricted range of independent variables can create significant bias in regression (Schmidt, Oh, and Le, 2006).”
• The five-factor model of personality traits and organizational citizenship behaviors: a meta-analysis. (2011, unknown): “We corrected for both direct and indirect range restriction following the correction procedures in F. L. Schmidt, Oh, and Le (2006).”
• Personnel selection. (2008, methodology): “Schmidt et al. (2006) apply this approach to meta-analysis, which has implicitly assumed direct range restriction, and show that applying a direct restriction correction when restriction is actually indirect results in a 21% underestimate of validity in a reanalysis of four existing meta-analytic…”
• A comparison of two approaches to correction of restriction of range in correlation analysis (2009, background): “Lately, a formula for indirect range restriction has been developed ( Schmidt, Oh, & Le, 2006 ).”
• The Validity of Assessment Centres for the Prediction of SupervisoryPerformance Ratings: A meta-analysis (2007, unknown): “Although there now exist procedures to correct for indirect range restriction (Hunter, Schmidt, & Le, 2006; Schmidt, Oh, & Le, 2006 ), we were not able to perform this correction as indirect range restriction data were not available in the primary studies.”
• The Assessment of Reliability Under Range Restriction (2012, background): “Indeed, many researchers have derived various statistical procedures assuming that restricted reliability estimates are unbiased (e.g., Schmidt et al., 2006; Raju & Brand, 2003).”
• Personality and Cognitive Ability as Predictors of Effective Performance at Work (2014, background): “Estimates of indirect range restriction are likely more accurate estimates of the impact of range restriction (see Schmidt et al. 2006).”