Prediction in HRM research–A gap between rhetoric and reality

77Citations
Citations of this article
304Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

There are broadly two dimensions on which researchers can evaluate their statistical models: explanatory power and predictive power. Using data on job satisfaction in ageing workforces, we empirically highlight the importance of distinguishing between these two dimensions clearly by showing that a model with a certain degree of explanatory power can produce vastly different levels of predictive power and vice versa—in the same and different contexts. In a further step, we review all the papers published in three top-tier human resource management journals between 2014 and 2018 to show that researchers generally confuse explanation and prediction. Specifically, while almost all authors rely solely on explanatory power assessments (i.e., assessing whether the coefficients are significant and in the hypothesised direction), they also derive practical recommendations, which inherently result from a predictive scenario. Based on our results, we provide HRM researchers recommendations on how to improve the rigour of their explanatory studies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sarstedt, M., & Danks, N. P. (2022, April 1). Prediction in HRM research–A gap between rhetoric and reality. Human Resource Management Journal. John Wiley and Sons Inc. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12400

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free