Rejecting situational specificity (SS) in meta-analysis requires assuming that residual variance in observed correlations is due to uncorrected artifacts (e.g., calculation errors). To test that assumption, 741 aggregations from 24 meta-analytic articles representing seven industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology domains (e.g., cognitive ability, job interviews) were coded for moderator subgroup specificity. In support of SS, increasing subgroup specificity yields lower mean residual variance per domain, averaging a 73.1% drop. Precision in mean rho (i.e., low SD(rho)) adequate to permit generalizability is typically reached at SS levels high enough to challenge generalizability inferences (hence, the “myth of generalizability”). Further, and somewhat paradoxically, decreasing K with increasing precision undermines certainty in mean r and Var(r) as meta-analytic starting points. In support of the noted concerns, only 4.6% of the 741 aggregations met defensibly rigorous generalizability standards. Four key questions guiding generalizability inferences are identified in advancing meta-analysis as a knowledge source.

Abstract. Hogan et al. (2013) proposed a personality-based model of employability that describes individual differences in (1) being rewarding to deal with, (2) being able to learn the job, and (3) being willing to work hard. In this study, we evaluated the model by selecting subscales from the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI; Hogan & Hogan, 2007 ) that best predicted supervisor ratings of competencies related to these three constructs. The psychometric properties of those scales were examined in independent samples. Results indicated that the scales converged with similar scales from other instruments, covaried in meaningful ways with observer descriptions, and predicted supervisor ratings of job performance. The measure – which is 64% shorter than the full HPI – includes personality characteristics applicable to most jobs across multiple job families that can be used to identify successful candidates.

Targeting a productive and rewarding fit between the worker and the work setting, industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology is heavily vested in identifying situational factors as main effects on work behavior, as moderators of personological (e.g., personality) influences, and as outcomes in understanding the workplace as a dynamic and evolving system. Here, we focus on the role of situations in the I-O psychology practices of job analysis, personnel selection and validation, training, work motivation, leadership, job design, and organizational development. Then, select workplace situational taxonomies are presented from the literature, organized by task (e.g., RIASEC), group (team task type), and organizational (e.g., culture) levels. Several broad situational features (e.g., situational strength, situational trait-relevance) are also identified. The chapter closes with some general observations aimed at advancing integration of situational factors in the psychology of work.

No abstract