Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T06:02:01.361Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Forgetting What We Learned as Graduate Students: HARKing and Selective Outcome Reporting in I–O Journal Articles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Joseph J. Mazzola  and
Jacqueline K. Deuling
Joseph J. Mazzola*
Affiliation:
Roosevelt University
Jacqueline K. Deuling
Affiliation:
Roosevelt University
*
E-mail: [email protected], Address: Department of Psychology, Roosevelt University, 1400 N. Roosevelt Blvd., Schaumburg, IL 60173
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , September 2013 , pp. 279 - 284
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, N., Herroit, P., & Hodgkinson, G. P. (2001). The practitioner-researcher divide in industrial, work and organizational (IWO) psychology: Where are we now, and where do we go from here? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 391–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedeian, A. G., Taylor, S. G., & Miller, A. N. (2010). Management science on the credibility bubble: Cardinal sins and various misdemeanors. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 715–725.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavior sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Daft, R. L. (1983). Learning the craft of organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 8, 539–546.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. J., & Heene, M. (2012). A vast graveyard of undead theories: Publication bias and psychological science's aversion to the null. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 550–556.Google Scholar
Harris, A., Reeder, R., & Hyun, J. (2011). Survey of editors and reviewers of high-impact psychology journals: Statistical and research design problems in submitted manuscript. The Journal of Psychology, 145, 195–209.Google Scholar
Kepes, S., & McDaniel, M. A. (2013). How trustworthy is the scientific literature in I–O psychology? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 6(3), 252–268.Google Scholar
Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 196–217.Google Scholar
McKinley, W. (2010). Organizational theory development: Displacement of ends? Organizational Studies, 31, 47–67.Google Scholar
Narayanan, L., Menon, S., & Spector, P. (1999). A cross-cultural comparison of job stressors and reactions among employees holding comparable jobs. International Journal of Stress Management, 6, 197–212.Google Scholar
Zickar, M. J., & Highhouse, S. (2001). Measuring prestige of journals in industrial-organizational psychology. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 38, 29–36.Google Scholar