@article{mount_barrick_scullen_rounds_2005, title={Higher-order dimensions of the big five personality traits and the big six vocational interest types}, volume={58}, ISSN={["1744-6570"]}, DOI={10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00468.x}, abstractNote={The purpose of this study was to identify higher‐order dimensions that explain the relationships among the Big 6 interest types and the Big 5 personality traits. Meta‐analyses were conducted to identify an 11 × 11 true score correlation matrix of interest and personality attributes. Cluster analysis and nonmetric multidimensional scaling were used to identify 3 dimensions that explained relations among the 11 attributes: (a) Interests versus Personality Traits; (b) Striving for Accomplishment Versus Striving for Personal Growth, and (c) Interacting with People Versus Interacting with Things. Overall, results clarified the relationships among interests and personality traits by showing that 3 rather than 2 dimensions best explain the relationships among interests and personality traits.}, number={2}, journal={PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY}, author={Mount, MK and Barrick, MR and Scullen, SM and Rounds, J}, year={2005}, pages={447–478} }
 @article{conway_lievens_scullen_lance_2004, title={Bias in the correlated uniqueness model for MTMM data}, volume={11}, ISSN={["1532-8007"]}, DOI={10.1207/s15328007sem1104_3}, abstractNote={This simulation investigates bias in trait factor loadings and intercorrelations when analyzing multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) data using the correlated uniqueness (CU) confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model. A theoretical weakness of the CU model is the assumption of uncorrelated methods. However, previous simulation studies have shown little bias in trait estimates even when true method correlations are large. We hypothesized that there would be substantial bias when both method factor correlations and method factor loadings were large. We generated simulated sample data using population parameters based on our review of actual MTMM results. Results confirmed the prediction; substantial bias occurred in trait factor loadings and correlations when both method loadings and method correlations were large.}, number={4}, journal={STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL}, author={Conway, JM and Lievens, F and Scullen, SE and Lance, CE}, year={2004}, pages={535–559} }
 @article{scullen_mount_judge_2003, title={Evidence of the construct validity of developmental ratings of managerial performance}, volume={88}, ISSN={["1939-1854"]}, DOI={10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.50}, abstractNote={The construct validity of developmental ratings of managerial performance was assessed by using 2 data sets, each based on a different 360 degrees rating instrument. Specifically, the authors investigated the nature of the constructs measured by developmental ratings, the structural relationships among those constructs, and the generalizability of results across 4 rater perspectives (boss, peer, subordinate, and self). A structure with 4 lower order factors (Technical Skills, Administrative Skills, Human Skills, and Citizenship Behaviors) and 2 higher order factors (Task Performance and Contextual Performance) was tested against competing models. Results consistently supported the lower order constructs, but the higher order structure was problematic, indicating that the structure of ratings is not yet well understood. Multisample analyses indicated few practically significant differences in factor structures across perspectives.}, number={1}, journal={JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY}, author={Scullen, SE and Mount, MK and Judge, TA}, year={2003}, month={Feb}, pages={50–66} }
 @article{lance_noble_scullen_2002, title={A critique of the correlated trait-correlated method and correlated uniqueness models for multitrait-multimethod data}, volume={7}, ISSN={["1082-989X"]}, DOI={10.1037//1082-989X.7.2.228}, abstractNote={The correlated trait-correlated method (CT-CM) and correlated uniqueness (CU) confirmatory factor analysis models for multitrait-multimethod data are critiqued. Although the CU model often returns convergent and admissible factor solutions when the CT-CM model does not, the CU model is shown to have theoretical and substantive shortcomings. On the basis of this critique, the authors recommend that the CT-CM model be regarded as the generally preferred model and that the CU model be invoked only when the CT-CM model fails.}, number={2}, journal={PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS}, author={Lance, CE and Noble, CL and Scullen, SE}, year={2002}, month={Jun}, pages={228–244} }
 @article{aiman-smith_scullen_barr_2002, title={Conducting studies of decision making in organizational contexts: A tutorial for policy-capturing and other regression-based techniques}, volume={5}, ISSN={["1552-7425"]}, DOI={10.1177/109442802237117}, abstractNote={ Policy-capturing, conjoint analysis, and related techniques are all regression-based methods used in various areas of organizational research to determine the importance people attach to cues when they make decisions. Despite the widespread use of those methods, the organizational research literature lacks an integrated tutorial for researchers who are interested in studying decision making but who have little experience with the techniques required for this type of research. The authors use empirical findings and suggestions from a number of sources to offer a step-by-step tutorial covering the effective design, execution, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of policy-capturing studies. }, number={4}, journal={ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS}, author={Aiman-Smith, L and Scullen, SE and Barr, SH}, year={2002}, month={Oct}, pages={388–414} }
 @article{scullen_mount_goff_2000, title={Understanding the latent structure of job performance ratings}, volume={85}, ISSN={["1939-1854"]}, DOI={10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.956}, abstractNote={This study quantified the effects of 5 factors postulated to influence performance ratings: the ratee's general level of performance, the ratee's performance on a specific dimension, the rater's idiosyncratic rating tendencies, the rater's organizational perspective, and random measurement error. Two large data sets, consisting of managers (n = 2,350 and n = 2,142) who received developmental ratings on 3 performance dimensions from 7 raters (2 bosses, 2 peers, 2 subordinates, and self) were used. Results indicated that idiosyncratic rater effects (62% and 53%) accounted for over half of the rating variance in both data sets. The combined effects of general and dimensional ratee performance (21% and 25%) were less than half the size of the idiosyncratic rater effects. Small perspective-related effects were found in boss and subordinate ratings but not in peer ratings. Average random error effects in the 2 data sets were 11% and 18%.}, number={6}, journal={JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY}, author={Scullen, SE and Mount, MK and Goff, M}, year={2000}, month={Dec}, pages={956–970} }
 @article{carlson_scullen_schmidt_rothstein_erwin_1999, title={Generalizable biographical data validity can be achieved without multi-organizational development and keying}, volume={52}, ISSN={["0031-5826"]}, DOI={10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00179.x}, abstractNote={This research showed that the validity of a biodata instrument developed and keyed within a single organization can generalize to other organizations. It also examines a criterion measure‐rate of promotional progress‐that has not been used extensively in biodata research, but has several characteristics that make its use attractive. The validity of the biodata component of the Manager Profile Record (MPR), developed and keyed within a single organization, as a predictor of rate of managerial progress was cross‐validated on a sample of 7,334 managers and staff professionals in 24 organizations. Results indicate the MPR was a valid predictor of rate of promotional progress across all organizations and that validity did not vary greatly across organizations (p= .53, SDp= .05). The MPR was also a valid predictor for both sexes, as well as for managers of all age groups, lengths of company service, and education levels. These findings demonstrate that multiple‐firm development and keying of a biodata instrument was not required for generalizable validity, and argue against the hypothesis of situational specificity. Suggestions for developing biodata instruments in single organizations that will generalize to other organizations include careful attention to the validity and reliability of criterion measures and developing validity at the item level.}, number={3}, journal={PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY}, author={Carlson, KD and Scullen, SE and Schmidt, FL and Rothstein, H and Erwin, F}, year={1999}, pages={731–755} }