Featured Articles

President's Column

Mort McPhail

Meredith Turner 0 1736 Article rating: No rating

I’m not sure how time can move so quickly from the heat of summer to the heat of an election (on that topic see the thought experiment in the October TIP by Jessica Deselms, Lauren Bahls, Kristie Campana, and Daniel Sachau) to the halcyon clear, crisp days on autumn. Right now we’re having what we referred to in my consulting days as “recruiting weather”—just don’t tell them about August in Houston.

Letters to the Editor

George Graen, Alexis Fink, and Rob Silzer

Jim Rebar 0 1629 Article rating: No rating

Dear Editor, 

The feature article by Sheila List and Michael McDaniel, concerning the practice of when to state empirical hypothesis before analyses or not, was disturbing.  At the recent SOB conference at the University of Nebraska the consensus was that the observed lack of proper training was evident in our best journals.  The interpretation of the HARKing practice as a QRP is false.  My deeper question is how can we reverse this decline in quality of I-O and OB research?  Several editors of leading journals expressed concern about the poor training of their reviewers and that so many well-trained people do not make time to review papers.  We had no quick fix.  Returning to this strange new word called HARKing, I agreed that submitting false information and selective reporting with intention to misinform are not questionable, but unethical and may be illegal.  When discovered, these practices need to be punished by the research community.



Information on this website, including articles, white papers, and other resources, is provided by SIOP staff and members. We do not include third-party content on our website or in our publications, except in rare exceptions such as paid partnerships.