reliability Consistency or stability of a measure. validity The accuracy of inferences made based on test or performance data; also addresses whether a measure accurately and completely represents what was intended to be measured.
My question from this information is should I-O psychologists interpret scores differently depending on the circumstance. For example hiring a new candidate versus training one or simply doing research about a potential promotion?
In a criterion-related study, there is a tight focus on a test score and a performance score. In content-related validation, there is a tight focus on a job analysis.
Is it ethical to use a test for hiring if its construct validity is unclear but its predictive validity is strong? I keep going back and forth in my head because where is there a happy middle to this? This must mean there's a lot of personal judgement being used here instead of statistics and science.
Formulating ethical guidelines for I-O psychologists can be very challenging because the work of an I-O psychologist is incredibly varied.
I had to do a lot of surveys for my internship capstone project this past summer. These were anonymous but they ended up being shared with my manager and team and then went to her superordinate. So I am wondering who should own employee data: the employee, their employer, boss or I-O psychologist? I feel like it can get really messy because if the I-O psychologist believes their superordinate should know but it is confidential information, the lines could get blurry.
quantitative methods Rely on tests, rating scales, questionnaires, and physiological measures and yield numerical results. qualitative methods Rely on observations, interviews, case studies, and analysis of diaries or written documents and produce flow diagrams and narrative descriptions of events or processes.
With AI and technology quite literally taking over the world, do you think qualitative methods better suited for studying marginalized or underrepresented employee experiences? Because a lot of this probably has to be verbally communicated rather than based on statistics and calculations. Everyone's experience is different and underrepresented employees probably aren't represented that well in the company's statistics.
Industrial-Organizational (called I-O) Psychologists recognize the interdependence of individuals, organizations, and society, and they recognize the impact of factors such as increasing government influences, growing consumer awareness, skill shortages, and the changing nature of the workforce. I-O psychologists facilitate responses to issues and problems involving people at work by serving as advisors and catalysts for business, industry, labor, public, academic, community, and health organizations.
If you think about it, IO psychologists really are trained to care about the well-being of individuals in the company. There's really no other group of people in a workplace that are trained like that and are tasked with that responsibility. There are individual people in a workplace that are, but IO psychologists can really be the backbone of a quality workplace.