These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

94 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22582730)

  • 1. On reconciling conflicting meta-analytic findings regarding integrity test validity.
    Sackett PR; Schmitt N
    J Appl Psychol; 2012 May; 97(3):550-6. PubMed ID: 22582730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Integrity tests predict counterproductive work behaviors and job performance well: comment on Van Iddekinge, Roth, Raymark, and Odle-Dusseau (2012).
    Ones DS; Viswesvaran C; Schmidt FL
    J Appl Psychol; 2012 May; 97(3):537-42. PubMed ID: 22582728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Test publishers' perspective on "an updated meta-analysis": comment on Van Iddekinge, Roth, Raymark, and Odle-Dusseau (2012).
    Harris WG; Jones JW; Klion R; Arnold DW; Camara W; Cunningham MR
    J Appl Psychol; 2012 May; 97(3):531-6. PubMed ID: 22582727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The critical role of the research question, inclusion criteria, and transparency in meta-analyses of integrity test research: a reply to Harris et al. (2012) and Ones, Viswesvaran, and Schmidt (2012).
    Van Iddekinge CH; Roth PL; Raymark PH; Odle-Dusseau HN
    J Appl Psychol; 2012 May; 97(3):543-9; discussion 531-6, 537-42. PubMed ID: 22582729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The criterion-related validity of integrity tests: an updated meta-analysis.
    Van Iddekinge CH; Roth PL; Raymark PH; Odle-Dusseau HN
    J Appl Psychol; 2012 May; 97(3):499-530. PubMed ID: 21319880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Personnel selection: looking toward the future--remembering the past.
    Hough LM; Oswald FL
    Annu Rev Psychol; 2000; 51():631-64. PubMed ID: 10751983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect size indices for analyses of measurement equivalence: understanding the practical importance of differences between groups.
    Nye CD; Drasgow F
    J Appl Psychol; 2011 Sep; 96(5):966-80. PubMed ID: 21463015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Does forcing reduce faking? A meta-analytic review of forced-choice personality measures in high-stakes situations.
    Cao M; Drasgow F
    J Appl Psychol; 2019 Nov; 104(11):1347-1368. PubMed ID: 31070382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Using individual differences to predict job performance: correcting for direct and indirect restriction of range.
    Sjöberg S; Sjöberg A; Näswall K; Sverke M
    Scand J Psychol; 2012 Aug; 53(4):368-73. PubMed ID: 22612634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Revisiting meta-analytic estimates of validity in personnel selection: Addressing systematic overcorrection for restriction of range.
    Sackett PR; Zhang C; Berry CM; Lievens F
    J Appl Psychol; 2022 Nov; 107(11):2040-2068. PubMed ID: 34968080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Incremental validity of person-organization fit over the Big Five personality measures.
    Tsai WC; Chen HY; Chen CC
    J Psychol; 2012; 146(5):485-509. PubMed ID: 22931006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effects of predictor method factors on selection outcomes: A modular approach to personnel selection procedures.
    Lievens F; Sackett PR
    J Appl Psychol; 2017 Jan; 102(1):43-66. PubMed ID: 27618408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Pre-employment integrity testing across multiple industries.
    Fine S
    Psychol Rep; 2010 Oct; 107(2):607-10. PubMed ID: 21117489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A Prorating Method for Estimating MMPI-2-RF Scores From MMPI Responses: Examination of Score Fidelity and Illustration of Empirical Utility in the PERSEREC Police Integrity Study Sample.
    Tarescavage AM; Corey DM; Ben-Porath YS
    Assessment; 2016 Apr; 23(2):173-90. PubMed ID: 25848124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessing personality with a structured employment interview: construct-related validity and susceptibility to response inflation.
    Van Iddekinge CH; Raymark PH; Roth PL
    J Appl Psychol; 2005 May; 90(3):536-52. PubMed ID: 15910148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. An evaluation of the consequences of using short measures of the Big Five personality traits.
    Credé M; Harms P; Niehorster S; Gaye-Valentine A
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2012 Apr; 102(4):874-88. PubMed ID: 22352328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Getting the right people on the bus.
    Wagner B
    Caring; 2012 Jan; 31(1):10-3. PubMed ID: 22400433
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Regulatory focus and work-related outcomes: a review and meta-analysis.
    Lanaj K; Chang CH; Johnson RE
    Psychol Bull; 2012 Sep; 138(5):998-1034. PubMed ID: 22468880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Assessment centers versus cognitive ability tests: Challenging the conventional wisdom on criterion-related validity.
    Sackett PR; Shewach OR; Keiser HN
    J Appl Psychol; 2017 Oct; 102(10):1435-1447. PubMed ID: 28530416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The relationship between the FFM and personality disorders in a personnel selection sample.
    Nederström M; Furnham A
    Scand J Psychol; 2012 Oct; 53(5):421-9. PubMed ID: 22882662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.