scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Robert E. Ployhart

Bio: Robert E. Ployhart is an academic researcher from University of South Carolina. The author has contributed to research in topics: Situational judgement test & Human capital. The author has an hindex of 61, co-authored 154 publications receiving 14043 citations. Previous affiliations of Robert E. Ployhart include Michigan State University & George Mason University.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The trade-offs among analytic strategies (repeated measures general linear model, random coefficient modeling, and latent growth modeling), circumstances in which such methods are most appropriate, and ways to analyze data when one is using each approach are discussed.

1,071 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a multilevel model connecting micro, intermediate, and macro levels of scholarship is proposed for the conceptualization of the human capital resource, which is created from the emergence of individuals' knowledge, skills, abilities, or other characteristics.
Abstract: This article offers a new approach to the conceptualization of the human capital resource by developing a multilevel model connecting micro, intermediate, and macro levels of scholarship. We define human capital as a unit-level resource that is created from the emergence of individuals' knowledge, skills, abilities, or other characteristics. The model provides new insights into how strategically valuable human capital resources have their origins in the psychological attributes of individuals and are transformed through unit-level processes.

908 citations

OtherDOI
29 Sep 2014
TL;DR: This chapter provides a brief and relatively nontechnical introduction to hierarchical linear models and their purpose is first explained in graphical terms.
Abstract: This chapter provides a brief and relatively nontechnical introduction to hierarchical linear models. The purpose of such models is first explained in graphical terms. This is followed by a description of the model and then an empirical example. Numerous primary sources are provided for readers to learn the more technical details. Keywords: hierarchical linear modeling; random coefficient modeling

745 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors illustrate how random coefficient modeling can be used to develop growth models for the analysis of longitudinal data using a model comparison framework and illustrates the value of using likelihood tests to contrast alternative models.
Abstract: In this article, the authors illustrate how random coefficient modeling can be used to develop growth models for the analysis of longitudinal data. In contrast to previous discussions of random coefficient models, this article provides step-by-step guidance using a model comparison framework. By approaching the modeling this way, the authors are able to build off a regression foundation and progressively estimate and evaluate more complex models. In the model comparison framework, the article illustrates the value of using likelihood tests to contrast alternative models (rather than the typical reliance on tests of significance involving individual parameters), and it provides code in the open-source language R to allow readers to replicate the results. The article concludes with practical guidelines for estimating growth models.

678 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The microfoundations movement in macro management as mentioned in this paper has received increased attention in strategy and organization theory over the past decade, and the micro-foundations research has been widely studied.
Abstract: Microfoundations have received increased attention in strategy and organization theory over the past decade. In this paper, we take stock of the microfoundations movement, its origins and history, and disparate forms. We briefly touch on similar micro movements in disciplines such as economics and sociology. However, our particular focus is on the unique features of the microfoundations movement in macro management. While the microfoundations movement in macro management does seek to link with more micro disciplines such as psychology and organizational behavior, it also features a unique set of questions, assumptions, theoretical mechanisms, and independent/dependent variables that complement the focus in the micro disciplines. We also discuss the disparate criticisms of the microfoundations literature and the challenges the movement faces, such as defining distinct theoretical and empirical programs for microfoundational research. The overall purpose of this manuscript is to clearly delineate the promise and uniqueness of microfoundations research in macro management, to discuss how the movement originated and where it is going, and to offer rich opportunities for future work.

635 citations


Cited by
More filters
Book
01 Jan 2009

8,216 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors make a case for the importance of reporting variance explained (R2) as a relevant summarizing statistic of mixed-effects models, which is rare, even though R2 is routinely reported for linear models and also generalized linear models (GLM).
Abstract: Summary The use of both linear and generalized linear mixed-effects models (LMMs and GLMMs) has become popular not only in social and medical sciences, but also in biological sciences, especially in the field of ecology and evolution. Information criteria, such as Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), are usually presented as model comparison tools for mixed-effects models. The presentation of ‘variance explained’ (R2) as a relevant summarizing statistic of mixed-effects models, however, is rare, even though R2 is routinely reported for linear models (LMs) and also generalized linear models (GLMs). R2 has the extremely useful property of providing an absolute value for the goodness-of-fit of a model, which cannot be given by the information criteria. As a summary statistic that describes the amount of variance explained, R2 can also be a quantity of biological interest. One reason for the under-appreciation of R2 for mixed-effects models lies in the fact that R2 can be defined in a number of ways. Furthermore, most definitions of R2 for mixed-effects have theoretical problems (e.g. decreased or negative R2 values in larger models) and/or their use is hindered by practical difficulties (e.g. implementation). Here, we make a case for the importance of reporting R2 for mixed-effects models. We first provide the common definitions of R2 for LMs and GLMs and discuss the key problems associated with calculating R2 for mixed-effects models. We then recommend a general and simple method for calculating two types of R2 (marginal and conditional R2) for both LMMs and GLMMs, which are less susceptible to common problems. This method is illustrated by examples and can be widely employed by researchers in any fields of research, regardless of software packages used for fitting mixed-effects models. The proposed method has the potential to facilitate the presentation of R2 for a wide range of circumstances.

7,749 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The establishment of measurement invariance across groups is a logical prerequisite to conducting substantive cross-group comparisons (e.g., tests of group mean differences, invariance of structura, etc.).
Abstract: The establishment of measurement invariance across groups is a logical prerequisite to conducting substantive cross-group comparisons (e.g., tests of group mean differences, invariance of structura...

6,086 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that although different justice dimensions are moderately to highly related, they contribute incremental variance explained in fairness perceptions and illustrate the overall and unique relationships among distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice and several organizational outcomes.
Abstract: The field of organizationa l justice continues to be marked by several important research questions, including the size of relationships among justice dimensions, the relative importance of different justice criteria, and the unique effects of justice dimensions on key outcomes. To address such questions, the authors conducted a meta-analytic review of 183 justice studies. The results suggest that although different justice dimensions are moderately to highly related, they contribute incremental variance explained in fairness perceptions. The results also illustrate the overall and unique relationships among distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice and several organizational outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, organizational commitment, evaluation of authority, organizational citizenship behavior, withdrawal, performance). These findings are reviewed in terms of their implications for future research on organizationa l justice.

5,097 citations

01 Jan 2006
TL;DR: For example, Standardi pružaju okvir koje ukazuju na ucinkovitost kvalitetnih instrumenata u onim situacijama u kojima je njihovo koristenje potkrijepljeno validacijskim podacima.
Abstract: Pedagosko i psiholosko testiranje i procjenjivanje spadaju među najvažnije doprinose znanosti o ponasanju nasem drustvu i pružaju temeljna i znacajna poboljsanja u odnosu na ranije postupke. Iako se ne može ustvrditi da su svi testovi dovoljno usavrseni niti da su sva testiranja razborita i korisna, postoji velika kolicina informacija koje ukazuju na ucinkovitost kvalitetnih instrumenata u onim situacijama u kojima je njihovo koristenje potkrijepljeno validacijskim podacima. Pravilna upotreba testova može dovesti do boljih odluka o pojedincima i programima nego sto bi to bio slucaj bez njihovog koristenja, a također i ukazati na put za siri i pravedniji pristup obrazovanju i zaposljavanju. Međutim, losa upotreba testova može dovesti do zamjetne stete nanesene ispitanicima i drugim sudionicima u procesu donosenja odluka na temelju testovnih podataka. Cilj Standarda je promoviranje kvalitetne i eticne upotrebe testova te uspostavljanje osnovice za ocjenu kvalitete postupaka testiranja. Svrha objavljivanja Standarda je uspostavljanje kriterija za evaluaciju testova, provedbe testiranja i posljedica upotrebe testova. Iako bi evaluacija prikladnosti testa ili njegove primjene trebala ovisiti prvenstveno o strucnim misljenjima, Standardi pružaju okvir koji osigurava obuhvacanje svih relevantnih pitanja. Bilo bi poželjno da svi autori, sponzori, nakladnici i korisnici profesionalnih testova usvoje Standarde te da poticu druge da ih također prihvate.

3,905 citations