South African Journal Of Industrial Psychology Research Articles

Debating the scientific credibility of industrial and organisational psychology: A rebuttal

Problematisation: The credibility and transparency of industrial and organisational psychological (IOP) research within South Africa was recently challenged by Efendic and Van Zyl (2019). The authors briefly showed inconsistencies in statistical results reported by authors of the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP), that various studies were insufficiently powered, that best-practice guidelines for the reporting of results were mostly only partially followed and that no transparency exists with regard to the research process. They demonstrated that authors of the SAJIP may knowingly or unknowingly be engaging in questionable research practices, which directly affects the credibility of both the discipline and the journal. Furthermore, they suggested practical guidelines for both authors and the SAJIP on how this could be managed. Implications: Based on these suggestions, the authors invited prominent members of the IOP scientific community to provide scholarly commentary on their paper in order to aid in the development of ‘a clear strategy on how [the confidence crisis in IOP] could be managed, what the role of SAJIP is in this process and how SAJIP and its contributors could proactively engage to address these issues'. Seven members of the editorial board and two international scholars provided commentaries in an attempt to further the debate about the nature, causes, consequences and management of the credibility crisis within the South African context. Purpose: The purpose of this final rebuttal article was to summarise and critically reflect on the commentaries of the nine articles to advance the debate on the confidence crisis within the South African IOP discipline. Recommendations: All SAJIP's stakeholders (authors, editors, reviewers, the publication house, universities and the journal) can play an active role in enhancing the credibility of the discipline. It is suggested that SAJIP should develop a clear and structured strategy to promote credible, transparent and ethical research practices within South Africa.

Enhancing scientific credibility: An open science strategy for the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology

Orientation: The purpose of this editorial was to provide an introduction and a general overview of the special issue on Open Science Practices: A Vision for the Future of SAJIP, as hosted in the 45th edition of the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP). Specifically, the aim was to provide a viable, practical and implementable strategy for enhancing the scientific credibility, transparency and international stature of SAJIP.

On the future of South African Journal of Industrial Psychology

Problemification: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed method research all have a place in industrial and organisational psychology (IOP) research. Sometimes, the impression that is created is that the one is favoured over the other in the manner in which arguments are formulated. Implications: If an article suggests a strong preference for one specific research method, it creates a split in the sense of what good IOP research represents. Purpose: The purpose is to create an awareness about how specific research methodologies are positioned in articles as if one is superior to another. Recommendation: It is recommended that the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP) will remain unbiased towards this situation and maintain the necessary balance.

Examining the strings of our violins whilst Rome is burning: A rebuttal

Problemification: In response to the admirable objective of Efendic and Van Zyl’s (2019) article to offer recommendations to address the crisis of replication in industrial organisational psychology (IOP), I offer the counter-argument that this immediate crisis, although important, is of lesser importance in the greater scheme of the challenges faced by IOP, going into the future. It is merely symptomatic of a deeper and greater illness in IOP.Implications: I contend that the ‘lesser’ crisis of replication pales into insignificance against the backdrop of three accelerating and snowballing, interacting meta-crises within IOP: (1) growing irrelevance (= a burning Rome), (2) an outdated, constraining research paradigm (= an antiquated violin) and (3) ill, even toxic, research community dynamics and functioning (= our stressed-out violinists).Purpose: The aim of my rebuttal is to elucidate the three meta-crises and point out their life-threatening implications for IOP going into the future. Future-fit responses to address these meta-crises are offered.Recommendations: Given these meta-crises, going forward in building the academic reputation of the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP), a number of recommendations are made regarding making SAJIP future-proof (= fit-for-purpose, fire-fighting violins and violinists).

On reproducibility and replicability: Arguing for open science practices and methodological improvements at the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology

Problematisation: In recent years, psychology has been going through a crisis of sorts. Research methods and practices have come under increased scrutiny, with many issues identified as negatively contributing to low replicability and reproducibility of psychological research.Implications: As a consequence, researchers are increasingly called upon to overhaul and improve their research process. Various stakeholders within the scientific community are arguing for more openness and rigor within industrial and organisational (I-O) psychological research. A lack of transparency and openness further fuels criticisms as to the credibility and trustworthiness of I-O psychology which negatively affects the evidence-based practices which it supports. Furthermore, traditional gate-keepers such as grant agencies, professional societies and journals, are adapting their policies, reflecting an effort to curtail these trends.Purpose: The purpose of this opinion paper is, therefore, to stimulate an open dialogue with the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP) contributing authors, its editorial board and readership about the challenges associated with the replication crisis in psychology. Furthermore, it attempts to discuss how the identified issues affect I-O psychology and how these could be managed through open science practices and other structural improvements within the SAJIP.Recommendations: We enumerate several easily implementable open science practices, methodological improvements and editorial policy enhancements to enhance credibility and transparency within the SAJIP. Relying on these, we recommend changes to the current practices that can be taken up by researchers and the SAJIP to improve reproducibility and replicability in I-O psychological science.

<i>South African Journal of Industrial Psychology</i>: Annual editorial review 2016

No abstract available.

Two decades of qualitative research in Psychology, Industrial and Organisational Psychology and Human Resource Management within South Africa: A critical review

Orientation: Qualitative research is marked by phenomenal growth and development over the years.Research purpose: This article aims to offer insight into the emerging qualitative methodologies used in the fields of Psychology, Industrial and Organisational Psychology and Human Resource Management.Motivation for the study: The value of qualitative organisational research has been recognised since the 1970s. Regardless of its perceived value, national and international trends show a greater tendency for quantitative research.Research design, approach and method: This article investigates qualitative articles (n = 242) published over two decades in the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP), South African Journal of Psychology (SAJP), and the South African Journal of Human Resource Management (SAJHRM). More specifically, a content analysis was conducted to highlight the trends of paradigms, designs and analysis methods employed in the studies.Main findings: Although there seems to be a slight increase in qualitative publications over the years, qualitative studies show a lower volume than its counterparts. The SAJIP published the least qualitative articles when compared to the SAJP and SAJHRM. There is a pattern of preference for specific paradigms and methods in all the journals. Overall, all the journals carry a large number of articles that do not specifically state their paradigmatic alignment or the designs they used, while some articles omits the methodology used in the studies altogether.Practical/managerial implications: The results indicate a clear need for increased exposure to qualitative methodology, both by publishing more qualitative studies in local journals and by providing formal training opportunities. A publication does not solely rely on authorship, but also on a review process. Therefore certain adjustments in this process may lead to more and better qualitative publications in future.Contribution/value-add: This article provides a critical analysis of the current trends and developments in qualitative research conducted in Industrial and Organisational Psychology(IOP) research in South Africa. The study identifies dominant methodologies in use, and thereby identifies possible opportunities to expand the ‘methodological menu’ of IOP research.

<i>South African Journal of Industrial and Organisational Psychology</i>: Annual editorial overview 2015

Annual editorial overview 2015.

A review of a decade’s scholarly publications (2004–2013) in the <i>South African Journal of Industrial Psychology</i>

Orientation: Publishing methodologically sound, empirically based studies in reputable accredited scientific journals are essential in order to advance knowledge and evidence-based practice in the field of industrial and organisational psychology.Research purpose: The purpose of the research was to conduct a broad content analysis of the articles published in the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP) between 2004 and 2013. The study aimed to provide a descriptive overview of the most frequent content themes,published authors and institutions, research approaches, strategies, designs and analysis techniques, software packages and sample sizes in industrial and organisational (I-O) psychology utilised in the publications.Motivation for study: The periodic analyses of published content in scholarly journals provide an index of the extent to which the publications reflect the scope of practice in a given discipline and broaden insight into the direction and relevance of research published in a journal.Research design, approach and method: A broad systematic content analysis was conducted of 342 documented articles published in the SAJIP between 2004 and 2013. Descriptive data(frequencies and percentages) were used to report the findings.Main findings: The publishing pattern of the SAJIP appeared to correspond with its focus and scope. Manuscripts utilising mostly cross-sectional quantitative correlational research designs with large samples (n > 201) were published in the SAJIP. The University of Johannesburg and Professor Sebastiaan (Ian) Rothmann were the largest contributors to publications between 2004 and 2013. Organisational psychology and psychometrics were the most prominent domains in I-O psychology research. Data were predominantly processed utilising SPSS.Practical implications: The insights derived from the findings can be employed to plan future research initiatives in the field of I-O psychology.Contribution/value-add: The findings provide valuable insight into the current status of the foci of I-O psychology research as published in the SAJIP between 2004 and 2013 and the contribution made by the SAJIP to advancing knowledge and evidence-based practice in I-O psychology.

<i>South African Journal of Industrial Psychology</i>: Annual editorial overview 2014

No abstract available.

Advancing research in industrial and organisational psychology – A brief overview of 2013

No abstract available.