Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

ANOTHER VIEW OF DYNAMIC CRITERIA: A CRITICAL REANALYSIS OF BARRETT, CALDWELL, AND ALEXANDER

ANOTHER VIEW OF DYNAMIC CRITERIA: A CRITICAL REANALYSIS OF BARRETT, CALDWELL, AND ALEXANDER We argue a divergent perspective from that taken by Barrett, Caldwell, and Alexander (1985) in a critical reanalysis of the evidence for dynamic criteria. Those authors distinguished three definitions of the dynamic criterion phenomenon and concluded, on the basis of secondary analyses of several sets of published data, that dynamic criteria do not exist. Moreover, they concluded that most of the temporal changes in criteria reported in those data sets could be explained by methodological artifacts. In several cases these artifacts were listed in summary form, without a complete consideration of the implications of invoking these artifacts as post hoc explanations. The purpose of this comment is to clarify the debate on dynamic criteria by critiquing the Barrett et al. study. We suggest that a fruitful solution to the problem may lie in trying to understand criteria per se rather than searching for artifacts. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Personnel Psychology Wiley

ANOTHER VIEW OF DYNAMIC CRITERIA: A CRITICAL REANALYSIS OF BARRETT, CALDWELL, AND ALEXANDER

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/another-view-of-dynamic-criteria-a-critical-reanalysis-of-barrett-sHdNPpLlTN
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0031-5826
eISSN
1744-6570
DOI
10.1111/j.1744-6570.1989.tb00670.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

We argue a divergent perspective from that taken by Barrett, Caldwell, and Alexander (1985) in a critical reanalysis of the evidence for dynamic criteria. Those authors distinguished three definitions of the dynamic criterion phenomenon and concluded, on the basis of secondary analyses of several sets of published data, that dynamic criteria do not exist. Moreover, they concluded that most of the temporal changes in criteria reported in those data sets could be explained by methodological artifacts. In several cases these artifacts were listed in summary form, without a complete consideration of the implications of invoking these artifacts as post hoc explanations. The purpose of this comment is to clarify the debate on dynamic criteria by critiquing the Barrett et al. study. We suggest that a fruitful solution to the problem may lie in trying to understand criteria per se rather than searching for artifacts.

Journal

Personnel PsychologyWiley

Published: Sep 1, 1989

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$499/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month