Validity generalization in the context of situational models.

Abstract

A primary objective of validity generalization (VG) analysis is to decompose the between-situation variance in validities into (a) variance attributable to between-situation differences in statistical artifacts and (b) variance attributable to between-situation differences in (unidentified) situational moderators. This process is based on the assumption that the effects of statistical artifacts on validities are independent of the effects of situational moderators on validities. The present article seeks to question the independence assumption by theoretically integrating situational variables into the VG estimation process. It is shown that the independence assumption may be untenable because at least one artifact-criterion reliability-is a function of, rather than independent of, the situational variables that moderate validities. An alternative approach to VG analysis is recommended. This approach rests heavily on proactive research designs in which potential situational moderators are included in the generalizability analysis.We would like to thank Charles Glisson for his helpful suggestions and advice.

Organizational climate as a moderator of safety knowledge–safety performance relationships

“…Organizational climate dimensions are those characteristics of workplaces that facilitate or inhibit the exhibition of certain behaviors (cf. James, Demaree, Mulaik, & Ladd, 1992;Schneider, 1975;Schneider, Smith, & Sipe, 2000). Two arguments for the mechanism behind organizational climate as a moderator variable lay foundations for these hypotheses: the restrictiveness-of-climate argument (James et al) and the strategically focused climate argument.…”

“…The expectation that organizational climate would moderate safety knowledge-safety performance relationships was, in part, based on James et al's (1992) and Russell and Gilliland's (1995) argument that organizational climate would influence relations between individual difference variables to the extent that organizational climate restricts criterion variance. The findings of the present study indicate that restriction of variance on the criterion is not a tenable explanation for the present results.…”

“…The aforementioned literature (i.e., James et al, 1992;Schneider, 1975) related to how organizational climate can function as a moderator was used to derive the current study hypotheses. Interestingly, both reviewed perspectives lead to the hypothesis that organizational climate for the transfer of safety training will moderate safety knowledge-safety performance relationships.…”

“…Two arguments for the mechanism behind organizational climate as a moderator variable lay foundations for these hypotheses: the restrictiveness-of-climate argument (James et al) and the strategically focused climate argument. James et al (1992) and Russell and Gilliland (1995) have presented the argument that organizational climate influences relationships between individual difference variables specifically in terms of 'restrictiveness-of-climate,' which they defined as the degree to which characteristics of organizational environments restrict individual decision-making and individual differences in job performance. Both sets of researchers proposed that restrictiveness-of-climate potentially impacts predictor-job performance relationships to the extent that organizational climate decreases the variance of job performance measures.…”

“…To illustrate their idea of moderation through criterion variance restriction, James et al (1992) gave the example of the effect of restrictiveness of climate on the ability-job performance relationship. The authors set up a hypothetical scenario in which individuals in different climates perform the same tasks, are appraised according to the same performance criterion, and were selected based on scores on the same aptitude test.…”