One of the dirty little secrets in the assessment business is the way that assessments are validated. There are no formal systematic approaches for the validation of tests that are easy for tests users, not versed in statistics, to follow.
A recent study published in PLoS ONE conducted a reanalysis of a meta-analysis on Positive Psychology Interventions (PPI’s). A meta-analysis is, in simple terms, a statistical means of combining data from a lot of studies, and is an analysis of analysis. The results of a meta-analysis are often more robust than single studies as they combine data from multiple sources.
I don’t the claims to measurement in our discipline are on shaky ground to put in politely. As such, I often think that we should be focussed more on the evaluation of usefulness rather than infinitesimally small gains in measurement accuracy.
The International Journal of Selection and Assessment recently included a feature article on the gamification of assessment. While the research methodology in the article was sound, I could not help but think that the article in many ways symbolised what is wrong with much of the assessment literature that emphasises psychometric properties as opposed to practical utility.
Many of us have experienced bosses whose behaviours we colloquially see as psychopathic, and this makes for attractive click-bait. The reality is however far more nuanced, and the research indicates once again that one swallow does not a summer make.
While the failure to replicate findings from the psychological literature has been a common critique of psychology in the recent press, one area of psychology which does appear to replicate is that of trait-based prediction, a finding that is especially relevant for I/O Psychology.
Turnitin, the plagiarism detector that most Universities use was sold, with the writer of the Nature article questioning its usefulness. Having used Turnitin for years now, I have found the software to be improving continually, and the software regularly picks most aspects of plagiarism relatively fast.
This week, scientists from around the world have made a call to stop the over-reliance on the use of statistical significance testing as a means of establishing what constitutes good science.
A new book has recently hit the market that I believe should be mandatory reading for most scientists in the field. The book is called - 'The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters The Myth Of The Female Brain' - and the key premise of the book is that men and women’s brains are simply not that different.
I believe that executive coaches, with the pre-requisites in business and a background and affiliation to psychology, make excellent coaches. Here are my top four reasons for the benefits of the executive psychologist as a coach.
