Metascience: Guidelines for the Practitioner. Issue 4 (November 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Turner, John R.; Brown, H. Quincy; Passmore, David L.; Nimon, Kim; Baker, Rose; Jeong, Shinhee; Flatt, Candace
• Other Names: Turner John R. guest-editor.; Baker Rose guest-editor.; Passmore David L. guest-editor.
• Is Part Of: Advances in developing human resources. Volume 21:Issue 4(2019)
• Page Start: 503
• Page End: 512
• Publication Date: 2019-11
• Subjects: metascience -- nonreproducibility -- rigor -- research reporting -- inference; Personnel management -- Periodicals; Organizational effectiveness -- Periodicals; Human capital -- Periodicals; 658.30105
• DOI: 10.1177/1523422319870790
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1523-4223

Abstract

The Problem: The trend in current research is to seek a statistically significant finding, one that provides a p value less than a predetermined alpha. Unfortunately, a large number of research studies have been identified as being nonreplicable along with having other shortcomings (low power, improper methodology, poor sample size) that reduce the rigor of a study's research findings. Additional techniques are needed beyond relying solely on a p value. The Solution: This article presents recommendations that Human Resource Development (HRD) scholars and scholar-practitioners can implement to improve the rigor of the discipline's research and practice. This article also provides guidelines (higher power, meta-analyses, low bias in large studies) of how to best avoid producing nonreplicability studies along with recommendations for the larger field, in this instance for scholars and scholar-practitioners in the social sciences. The Stakeholders: Scholars, scholar-practitioners, employees, and researchers who are impacted by changes in their environment due to less-than rigorous evidence-based research findings.