Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T11:27:02.992Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Not Another “Researcher-Centric” Index: A Cautionary Note

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 November 2017

Zhenyu Yuan  and
Kenneth G. Brown
Zhenyu Yuan*
Affiliation:
Department of Management and Organizations, University of Iowa
Kenneth G. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Management and Organizations, University of Iowa
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Zhenyu Yuan, University of Iowa, Department of Management and Organizations, 108 John Pappajohn Business Building, Iowa City, IA 52242. E-mail: zhenyu-yuan@uiowa.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In their focal article, Aguinis et al. (2017) conducted an empirical analysis of the most frequently cited sources, articles, and authors in industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology textbooks. The authors conclude that their “results are encouraging regarding the scientist–practitioner model” (p. 545). We disagree. Although we applaud the effort that went into this research, we are concerned that the method used in the article, focusing on textbook citations, creates yet another “researcher-centric” index that will do nothing to address the research–practice gap. The problematic “researcher-centric” perspective manifests itself in several ways in the focal article, which we elaborate below.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , December 2017 , pp. 598 - 602
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2017 

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

Aguinis, H., Bradley, K. J., & Brodersen, A. (2014). Industrial–organizational psychologists in business schools: Brain drain or eye opener? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 7, 284–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aguinis, H., Ramani, R. S., Campbell, P. K., Bernal-Turnes, P., Drewry, J. M., & Edgerton, B. T. (2017). Most frequently cited sources, articles, and authors in industrial-organizational psychology textbooks: Implications for the science-practice divide, scholarly impact, and the future of the field. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 10 (4), 507–557.Google Scholar
Arthur, W. Jr., Bennett, W. Jr., Edens, P. S., & Bell, S. T. (2003). Effectiveness of training in organizations: A meta-analysis of design and evaluation features. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 234–245.Google Scholar
Augier, M., & March, J. G. (2007). The pursuit of relevance in management education. California Management Review, 49, 129–146.Google Scholar
Bartunek, J. M. (2007). Academic-practitioner collaboration need not require joint or relevant research: Toward a relational scholarship of integration. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1323–1333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartunek, J. M., & Rynes, S. L. (2014). Academics and practitioners are alike and unlike: The paradoxes of academic–practitioner relationships. Journal of Management, 40, 1181–1201.Google Scholar
Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2008). Active learning: Effects of core training design elements on self-regulatory processes, learning, and adaptability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 296–316.Google Scholar
Bennis, W. G., & O'Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 83, 96–104.Google ScholarPubMed
Caprar, D. V., Do, B., Rynes, S. L., & Bartunek, J. M. (2016). It's personal: An exploration of students’ (non)acceptance of management research. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15, 207–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colbert, A. E., Rynes, S. L., & Brown, K. G. (2005). Who believes us? Understanding managers’ agreement with human resource research findings. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41, 304–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rynes, S. L., Giluk, T. L., & Brown, K. G. (2007). The very separate worlds of academic and practitioner periodicals in human resource management: Implications for evidence-based management. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 987–1008.Google Scholar
Schmidt, F. L. (2009). Select on intelligence. In Locke, E. A. (Ed.), Handbook of principles of organizational behavior (pp. 3–17). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar