Abstract

This study investigated self‐reported limitations of published papers as an alternative and novel operationalization of the state of science of industrial and organizational (I‐O) psychology. A content analysis was conducted of the reported limitations in every I‐O psychology articles published in the Academy of Management Journal, the Journal of Applied Psychology, and Personnel Psychology between 1995 and 2008 (N= 2,402). Articles were coded for the number and types of limitations reported, characteristics of the research design, and topic area. Threats to internal validity were the most often reported limitations. In addition, variations were detected in the reporting of limitations over time, indicating a subtle but steady shift in the focus of I‐O psychology research. Implications of these results for the science and practice of I‐O psychology and for the use of self‐reported limitations in scientific communication are discussed.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call