排序方式: 共有2条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1
1.
Edwards Jeffrey R.; Scully Judith A.; Brtek Mary D. 《Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly》2000,85(6):860
Research into the changing nature of work requires comprehensive models of work design. One such model is the interdisciplinary framework (M. A. Campion, 1988), which integrates 4 work-design approaches (motivational, mechanistic, biological, perceptual–motor) and links each approach to specific outcomes. Unfortunately, studies of this framework have used methods that disregard measurement error, overlook dimensions within each work-design approach, and treat each approach and outcome separately. This study reanalyzes data from M. A. Campion (1988), using structural equation models that incorporate measurement error, specify multiple dimensions for each work-design approach, and examine the work-design approaches and outcomes jointly. Results show that previous studies underestimate relationships between work-design approaches and outcomes and that dimensions within each approach exhibit relationships with outcomes that differ in magnitude and direction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) 相似文献
2.
This study tested effects of holding interviewers accountable for either the procedure they follow to make interview judgments (procedure accountability) or the accuracy of their judgments (outcome accountability) on interview validity. Undergraduates (N=338) simulated employment interviewers in an experiment that crossed 2 levels of procedure accountability with 2 levels of outcome accountability. They watched videotapes of 60 managers answering an interview question and rated the managers on leadership potential. The dependent variable was the correlation between their interview judgments and supervisory ratings of the managers' actual leadership performance on the job. Results showed that procedure accountability increased interview validity and outcome accountability lowered it. Participants' apparent attentiveness fully mediated effects of procedure accountability on interview validity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) 相似文献
1