A META‐ANALYSIS OF WORK SAMPLE TEST VALIDITY: UPDATING AND INTEGRATING SOME CLASSIC LITERATURE

By Philip L. Roth, Philip Bobko, Lynn A. McFarland. 2005

159 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a8e3c14b7152bf9d84941ae0091005e559902c17

How researchers see this paper

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

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. Herman Aguinis
2. Filip Lievens
3. Anand Jeyaraj
4. Rajiv Sabherwal
5. P. Sackett
6. Charles K. Chowa
7. Wayne F. Cascio
8. Greet van Hoye

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

1. Filip Lievens
2. P. Sackett
3. Herman Aguinis

Citations in the corpus

• 3 Staffing Twenty‐first‐century Organizations (2008, background): “Finally, for managerial and other high‐level jobs, there may be an additional stage, including a work‐sample test (Roth, Bobko, & McFarland, 2005 ) or an assessment center (Lance, Woehr, & Meade, 2007 ), in which applicants must demonstrate specific knowledge and skills by performing a limited num”
• Personnel selection. (2008, methodology): “One particularly important finding is a revisiting of the validity of work sample tests by Roth et al. (2005).”
• Information System Success: Individual and Organizational Determinants (2006, background): “8 This was because it is considered inappropriate to combine laboratory experiments with studies that do not include manipulations, experimental controls, and random assignment of subjects (e.g., surveys) in a meta-analysis (Egger, Ebrahim, and Smith 2002; Parker et al. 2003; and Roth, Bobko, and M”