What Are Peer-Reviewed, Primary and Empirical Articles?

What are Peer-Reviewed, Primary

and Empirical Articles?

Peer-Reviewed (or Refereed)

Before an article, book chapter or book is accepted for publication it is examined by several (at least 2, usually at least 3) experts on the topic of the article. These experts are called referees. The referees evaluate the article on whether or not it should be published. The referees evaluate the article on whether the article used appropriate methodology for the field, whether the topic is appropriate for the field and the importance of the findings to the field. To prevent personal bias, refereed journals use a blind review process where the referees do not know the name of the article’s author (and often there is a double blind review process; the article’s author does not know the names of the referees). The referees will report to the journal’s editor as to whether accept the article, reject it, or accept it with revisions.

How to identify refereed articles

·  Somewhere in the journal (usually on the back of the front cover) will be instructions to the authors. In the instructions will be a description of the submission process.

·  In PsychInfo, on the abstract page will be a category named, “Publication Type.” It will say “peer-reviewed journal,” if the journal is, indeed, peer-reviewed.

What’s not refereed

Articles written by employees (reporters) of the magazines or journals. E.G. Time, Newsweek, Psychology Today.

Primary Source

This refers to an article, book chapter or book which represents the author’s own and original work. Examples include; an article where an author has collected data herself and presents that data; or a book where an author develops and presents a new theory.

How to identify primary sources

·  For empirical articles, the author will describe her data collection process (Method, Results sections).

·  For theoretical articles or books, the author will present the theory as her own.

What’s not primary

Articles which describe the work of others. E.G. a literature review, such as a Psychological Bulletin article or an Annual Review of Psychology chapter; a Psychology Today article.

Meta-Analyses?

A meta-analysis is a statistical analysis of the results of many studies on the same topic. The conclusions of a meta-analysis can be considered primary, but nothing else (such as the descriptions of the studies that made up the meta-analysis).

Empirical Work

In Psychology, empirical work is based upon systematic observation of behavior. This could be an experiment, a quasi-experiment, a field experiment, an observational study, a questionnaire or a structured interview. The key is systematic observations. For example, in an interview, the author will describe a standard set of questions which were asked of all participants in a standard way and setting.

How to identify empirical work

·  In Psychology, a dead-giveaway is the presence of Method and Results sections.

·  Some I/O and Business articles will be empirical articles but will not have Method or Results sections. Look at the article and look for evidence that the author proposed hypotheses, collected data and tested the data to evaluate the hypotheses. Do not confuse a review article or a theoretical article with this latter type. A review article will propose hypothesis but not collect data nor evaluate the hypotheses.

What’s not empirical

A personal observation (Jane Elliot saying that based upon her 30 years of experience the Blue eye/Brown eye technique reduces racism; Jack Welch saying that using boundary-less organizational principles earned G.E. billions of dollars; David Rosenhan describing his experiences as a peudopatient). Unstructured interviews (a journalist interviews unwed mothers about how much stress they feel – this is an unstructured interview … how do you tell? if it was a structured interview the author would present a description of the structure of the interview … e.g. “all interviewees were asked the following 5 questions in order … their responses were recorded and analyzed by raters …”).

Take the Quiz!

For each of the following, determine whether the article is refereed, primary and/or empirical. You know that, you’ll need to look the articles up on PsychInfo to find information regarding it’s primary status.

Title: / Assessor Cognitive Processes in an Operational Assessment Center.
Author(s): / Lance, Charles E., Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, US,
Foster, Mark R., Institute of Government, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, US
Gentry, William A., Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, US
Thoresen, Joseph D., Cornerstone Systems, Carnegie, PA, US
Address: / Lance, Charles E., Department of Psychology, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA, US,
Source: / Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 89(1), Feb 2004. pp. 22-35.
Journal URL: http://www.apa.org/journals/apl.html
Publisher: / US: American Psychological Assn
Publisher URL: http://www.apa.org
ISSN: / 0021-9010 (Print)
Digital Object Identifier: / 10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.22
Language: / English
Key Concepts: / postexercise dimension ratings; assessment centers; situational specificity hypothesis; assessor cognitive processes; general impression model salient dimension model; job performance
Abstract: / The purpose of this study was (a) to provide additional tests of C. E. Lance, Newbolt, et al.'s (2000) situational specificity (vs. method bias) interpretation of exercise effects on assessment center postexercise dimension ratings and (b) to provide competitive tests of salient dimension versus general impression models of assessor within-exercise evaluations of candidate performance. Results strongly support the situational specificity hypothesis and the general impression model of assessor cognitive processes in which assessors first form overall evaluations of candidate performance that then drive more specific dimensional ratings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)(journal abstract)
Subjects: / *Assessment Centers; *Cognitive Processes; *Employment Tests; *Job Performance; *Personnel Evaluation
Classification: / Personnel Evaluation & Job Performance (3630)
Population: / Human (10)
Location: / US
Age Group: / Adulthood (18 yrs & older) (300)
Form/Content Type: / Empirical Study (0800)
Quantitative Study (0890)
Journal Article (2400)
Publication Type: / Peer Reviewed Journal (270); Print
Format(s) Available: Print
Release Date: / 20040209
Accession Number: / 2004-10572-003
Number of Citations in Source: / 51
Persistent link to this record: / http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,uid&db=psyh&an=2004-10572-003
Database: / PsycINFO
Title: / Self- versus others' ratings as predictors of assessment center ratings: Validation evidence for 360-degree feedback programs.
Author(s): / Atkins, Paul W. B., Australian Graduate School of Management, Australia,
Wood, Robert E., Australian Graduate School of Management, Australia
Address: / Atkins, Paul W. B., Australian National U, National Graduate School of Management, Canberra, ACT, Australia, 0200,
Source: / Personnel Psychology, Vol 55(4), Win 2002. pp. 871-904.
Publisher: / US: Personnel Psychology
Publisher URL: http://personnelpsychology.com
ISSN: / 0031-5826 (Print)
Language: / English
Key Concepts: / self-ratings; ratings; predictors; assessment center ratings; rating validity; 360-degree feedback programs
Abstract: / This study (n = 62 team leaders) had 2 main aims: First, to examine the validity of ratings from a 360-degree feedback program using assessment center ratings as an independent criterion and to determine which source (i.e., self, supervisor, peers, or subordinates) provided the most valid predictor of the criterion measure of competency. Second, to better understand the relationship between self-observer discrepancies and an independent criterion. The average of supervisor, peer, and subordinate ratings predicted performance on the assessment center, as did the supervisor ratings alone. The self-ratings were negatively and nonlinearly related to performance with some of those who gave themselves the highest ratings having the lowest performance on the assessment center. Supervisor ratings successfully discriminated between overestimators but were not as successful at discriminating underestimators, suggesting that more modest feedback recipients might be underrated by their supervisors. Peers overestimated performance for poor performers. Explanations of the results and the implications for the use of self-ratings in evaluations, the design of feedback reports, and the use of 360-degree feedback programs for involving and empowering staff are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)
Subjects: / *Assessment Centers; *Feedback; *Prediction; *Rating; *Statistical Validity
Classification: / Occupational & Employment Testing (2228)
Population: / Human (10)
Location: / Australia
Age Group: / Adulthood (18 yrs & older) (300)
Form/Content Type: / Empirical Study (0800)
Publication Type: / Peer Reviewed Journal (270); Print
Format(s) Available: Print
Release Date: / 20030102
Accession Number: / 2002-08510-007
Number of Citations in Source: / 44
Persistent link to this record: / http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,uid&db=psyh&an=2002-08510-007
Database: / PsycINFO

* from campus you can see the whole article by following this link

http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,uid&db=psyh&an=2002-08510-007

Title: / A field study of the effects of rating purpose on the quality of multisource ratings.
Author(s): / Greguras, Gary J., Louisiana State U, Dept of Psychology, Baton Rouge, LA, US,
Robie, Chet, Wilfrid Laurier U, Dept of Business, Waterloo, ON, Canada
Schleicher, Deidra J., U Tulsa, Dept of Psychology, Tulsa, OK, US
Goff, Maynard III, Personnel Decisions International
Address: / Greguras, Gary J., Louisiana State U, Dept of Psychology, 236 Audubon Hall, Baton Rouge, LA, US,
Source: / Personnel Psychology, Vol 56(1), Spr 2003. pp. 1-21.
Publisher: / US: Personnel Psychology
Publisher URL: http://personnelpsychology.com
ISSN: / 0031-5826 (Print)
Language: / English
Key Concepts: / reliability; variability; performance ratings; multisource ratings; peers; subordinates; rating purpose; rating quality; managers; generalizability theory
Abstract: / Using a field sample of peers and subordinates, this study employed generalizability theory to estimate sources of systematic variability associated with both developmental and administrative ratings (variance due to items, raters, etc.) and then used these values to estimate the dependability (i.e., reliability) of the performance ratings under various conditions. 454 managers in a large telecommunications company participated as ratees in this study. Ratings given by peers and subordinates were analyzed. Results indicate that the combined rater and rater-by-ratee interaction effect and the residual effect were substantially larger than the person effect (i.e., object of measurement) for both rater sources across both purpose conditions. For subordinates, the person effect accounted for a significantly greater percentage of total variance in developmental ratings than in administrative ratings; however, no differences were observed for peer ratings as a function of rating purpose. These results suggest that subordinate ratings are of significantly better quality when made for developmental than for administrative purposes, but the same is not true for peer ratings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)
Subjects: / *Job Performance; *Personnel Evaluation; *Rating; *Statistical Reliability; *Variability Measurement; Management Personnel; Peer Evaluation; Theories
Classification: / Occupational & Employment Testing (2228)
Personnel Evaluation & Job Performance (3630)
Population: / Human (10)
Male (30)
Female (40)
Age Group: / Adulthood (18 yrs & older) (300)
Form/Content Type: / Empirical Study (0800)
Publication Type: / Peer Reviewed Journal (270); Print
Format(s) Available: Print
Release Date: / 20030407
Accession Number: / 2003-02432-002
Number of Citations in Source: / 57
Persistent link to this record: / http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,uid&db=psyh&an=2003-02432-002

* from campus you can see the whole article by following this link

http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,uid&db=psyh&an=2003-02432-002

Title: / Assessment centers: What's new?
Author(s): / Joiner, Dennis,
Address: / Joiner, Dennis,
Source: / Public Personnel Management, Vol 31(2), Sum 2002. pp. 179-185.
Publisher: / US: International Public Management Association for Human Resources
Publisher URL: http://www.ipma-hr.org
ISSN: / 0091-0260 (Print)
Language: / English
Key Concepts: / assessment centers; assessment; employment
Abstract: / Discusses the definition of assessment centers and how assessment center results are used. Suggests that variations such as videos, multiple situations exercises, and situational judgment tests can be use in the assessment center process. The author notes that assessment centers and the related technology are a constantly evolving area within the discipline of testing and assessment. It is suggested that all assessment center concepts should be applied differently in every setting based on the unique requirements of that setting. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)
Subjects: / *Assessment Centers; *Employment Status; *Personnel Evaluation; *Testing
Classification: / Occupational Interests & Guidance (3610)
Publication Type: / Peer Reviewed Journal (270); Print
Format(s) Available: Print
Release Date: / 20020717
Accession Number: / 2002-15219-007
Number of Citations in Source: / 4
Persistent link to this record: / http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,uid&db=psyh&an=2002-15219-007
Database: / PsycINFO

* from campus you can see the whole article by following this link

http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,uid&db=psyh&an=2002-15219-007

Title: / A current review of public sector assessment centers: Cause for concern.
Author(s): / Ross, Joyce D., San Diego State U, School of Public Administration & Urban Studies
Source: / Public Personnel Management, Vol 8(1), Jan-Feb 1979. pp. 41-46.
Publisher: / US: International Public Management Association for Human Resources
Publisher URL: http://www.ipma-hr.org
ISSN: / 0091-0260 (Print)
Language: / English
Key Concepts: / public organizations' use of personnel assessment centers for management personnel selection & promotion, implications for legal challenges & critical evaluation
Abstract: / Public organizations have become increasingly involved in the use of assessment centers for selection purposes. Standards for such centers are reviewed, possible legal challenges are noted, and public organizations are asked to evaluate critically the conduct of their assessment centers. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)
Subjects: / *Government Personnel; *Management Personnel; *Personnel Evaluation; *Personnel Promotion; *Personnel Selection; Employment Tests; Legal Processes; Measurement
Classification: / Industrial & Organizational Psychology (3600)
Population: / Human (10)
Publication Type: / Peer Reviewed Journal (270); Print
Release Date: / 19800701
Accession Number: / 1980-22215-001
Persistent link to this record: / http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,uid&db=psyh&an=1980-22215-001
Database: / PsycINFO

* from campus you can see the whole article by following this link

http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,uid&db=psyh&an=1980-22215-001’

Title: / A Year In The Life.
Authors: / Kantrowitz, Barbara
Source: / Newsweek; 06/04/2001, Vol. 137 Issue 23, p42, 3p, 1c
Document Type: / Article
Subject Terms: / *EDUCATORS
*FIRST year teachers
*TEACHERS
*MIDDLE school teaching
Geographic Terms: / ILLINOIS
UNITED States
EVANSTON (Ill.)
Abstract: / Presents the experiences of Evanston, Illinois middle-school language arts teacher Elizabeth Jackson during one academic year. Jackson's anxieties over job performance and the success of her students; Her perceptions about being the youngest teacher in the school; Jackson's description of her first year of teaching as her first in the real world. INSET: 'There are no magic words that will motivate every student'.
Full Text Word Count: / 1882
ISSN: / 0028-9604
Accession Number: / 4487394
Persistent link to this record: / http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=4487394
Database: / Academic Search Premier

* from campus you can see the whole article by following this link