Skip to content

SIOP 2017: I/O Reformist vs. I/O Traditionalist

2017 June 16
by Richard N. Landers

One of the little things I noticed at SIOP this year – a little thing, but consistent across sessions and the people I talked to – is that there are two opposing stances toward the existential issues currently facing I/O psychology, and how to respond to them, at least among those aware of those issues: those of the traditionalist and the reformist.

First, the traditionalist.  I/O traditionalists tend to assume that everything’s okay and that this is a lot of noise about nothing important. I heard a lot of lines like, “We’ve been through this before” or “Practitioners don’t realize why theory’s so important” or “This too shall pass.” Traditionalists are not uniformly academics though; many practitioners believe in their tried-and-true-methods and think they are perfectly sufficient, that academia will continue to churn out small refinements, and that’s enough. Most of the foundational I/O techniques, like job analysis and basic scale design, were developed half a century ago, of course, and in general they still work great.

The most deeply entrenched traditionalists also seem to be the most deeply embedded in our current approach to publishing and have benefited in their own careers from mastering the approach: creating new theory is more important than any other goal, such as providing practical conclusions or using rigorous research methodology.

The second of these, and the side I fall on, is the reformist. Reformists tend to be a little younger, although not exclusively, perhaps more recently and first-hand having seen how broken our publishing system is. I met several mid-tenure Assistant Professors who when trying to publish their own work have realized that the standards for publishing are not precisely what they’d been taught. I could see their bubbles having recently shattered, and it is depressing. There are also overwhelmingly more practitioners in this group, people frustrated with how academia has seemingly ignored their pleas for years.

Reformists are a bit less uniform in their specific beliefs than traditionalists, but they all agree “something is wrong that need fixing.” Perhaps we need to better integrate science and practice. Perhaps we need to reach across the HR aisle. Perhaps we need to reach across the computer scientist aisle. Perhaps this is all the responsibility of SIOP leadership, or perhaps it can only be solved with a grassroots effort. So there is significant disagreement on what precisely is wrong, what precisely needs to be fixed, and how. The reformists I talked to also tended to be frustrated and disappointed that it became this broken before anyone in a position of power said anything publicly and attributed the magnitude of our current problems to that delay.

I also heard a couple of people resigned to no change, believing that our current momentum toward mediocrity will keep us moving that direction, that we are condemned to simply watch as I/O slowly fades from world relevance to an even less influential role for our field than we already hold. As a reformist, I’m not quite that pessimistic, myself.

What I was very happy to hear from both of these groups was a continuing desire to maintain the I/O community.  To me, this is the core strength of I/O; there is a strong “I/O psychologist” identity, as if the fact that we can’t call ourselves “I/O psychologists” to our clients and customers strengthens our awareness of that identity behind the scenes. To clients, we’re people analysts, or HR specialists, or senior consultants, or data scientists, or whatever other buzzword you might want. But to each other, we’re all I/Os. We’re all in this together, and so it’s together that we need to find a solution.

As for me, I don’t know what the solution is, where to find the right balance between reinventing ourselves and staying true to our traditions. But as a reformist, I’m confident there is one, if only we’ll try to find it together.

SIOP 2017: Twitter Analytics and Dataset

2017 May 24
tags: ,
by Richard N. Landers

It’s been about a month since SIOP 2017. I had a whole series of post-SIOP posts planned, but due to a death in the family, my schedule’s gone upside down! But never fear, dear reader, because I’m going to post them anyway!

All of these posts will center on my major takeaway from SIOP 2017: change is afoot.  One of the ways I noticed it was the increasingly rapid shift towards technology in the conference program. When I joined SIOP over a decade ago, there were maybe one or two sessions that had anything to do with technology research. These days, you cannot escape it; there’s a significant awareness that if we don’t engage technology head on, we’re going to be left behind.

One prominent outlet for technology engagement is Twitter. When I first started paying attention to Twitter during SIOP in 2011, there was not enough activity to write about.  This year, the #siop17 hashtag had 1631 posts between April 24 and May 2, which is the SIOP conference plus a few days around the outside.  A total of 282 unique Twitter accounts used the hashtag.  Considering the importance of SIOP, I feel confident saying that this captures most Twitter users in the I/O psychology Twitterverse.  With roughly 8000 SIOP members, I would hazard a guess that this means about 3.5% of SIOP is on Twitter (and maybe 7% of conference attendees).  Not big, but not tiny, and catching up to the US numbers (about 7% of the US population is on Twitter). So what better way to celebrate the trend toward embracing technology than some Twitter analytics?

If you’d like to play with this dataset yourself, feel free to download it here. I’ll be putting together some visualizations…eventually…so if you’d rather beat me to it and show off your R or Tableau skills, feel free.

For now, here are some high-level summary tables.

Most Active #siop17 Users

  1. (146) @SIOPtweets
  2. (75) @ghiovanni_m
  3. (59) @IBMWatsonTalent
  4. (52) @HugoMunsterberg
  5. (50) @TedHayes007
  6. (39) @DrCattell
  7. (34) @LewisGarrad
  8. (32) @allietumminia
  9. (32) @lisa_s_moore
  10. (28) @HoganAssessment

Most Retweeted Tweets

  1. (14) @SIOPtweets: #SIOP17 We have a new record! 4638 registrants so far- Welcome to Orlando!
  2. (14) @LewisGarrad: Great Teams Are About Personalities, Not Just Skills #SIOP17
  3. (13) @DDIworld: Congratulations, @EvanSinar for being saluted as one of the @SIOPtweets 2017 Fellows! #SIOP17
  4. (11) @AimeeGthePHD: GRIT-same wine, new bottle? Compelling data showing construct overlap. Are we really just measuring conscientiousness and ambition? #SIOP17”
  5. (11) @EvanSinar: Filing away my #SIOP17 program – tho rarely opened or carried with me onsite thanks to Whova’s awesomeness! Great work @DrZackHorn and team!
  6. (10) @TRPoeppelman: Congratulations @EvanSinar for being awarded Fellow at #SIOP17 – Exceptionally well deserved. #prestigiousaward #soproud
  7. (10) @BoArmstrong: Let’s go ahead and start off on the right foot. It’s #SIOP17, not #SIOP2017. Follow @SIOPtweets!
  8. (9) @ALOstasis: Congrats to @stevenrogelberg on receiving the inaugural SIOP Humanitarian Award! #SIOP17 #IOPsych
  9. (9) @rnlanders: #SIOP President Mort McPhail: Replicability, oversaturation of theory, and dissemination are the key existential issues facing us #siop17
  10. (9) @PeterReiley: #SIOP17: Come IGNITE solutions to help #military #veterans transition into the workforce | @SIOPtweets #IOPsych |

Most Favorited Tweets

  1. (45) @SIOPtweets: #SIOP17 We have a new record! 4638 registrants so far- Welcome to Orlando!
  2. (37) @HugoMunsterberg: To the #SIOP17 newbie in the next hotel room: You’ve practiced enough. It’s not the Gettysburg Address you’ll be mumbling through tomorrow.
  3. (34) @MikeZickar: At the #SIOP17 session on social media, hoping that someone will stand up and say, “I am @HugoMunsterberg!”
  4. (34) @rnlanders: #SIOP17 closing plenary with @NASA has convinced me that sometimes job performance measures can be dichotomous #didntcrashintoaplanet
  5. (33) @Aaron_Kraus: Session Update: Generations are more similar than different and everyone got a trophy. #IOPsych #SIOP17
  6. (25) @DDIworld: Congratulations, @EvanSinar for being saluted as one of the @SIOPtweets 2017 Fellows! #SIOP17
  7. (24) @VeronicaRabelo_: Thank you to all the custodians, housekeepers, chefs, + other service workers who make #SIOP17 possible!! You the real MVPs!! #SIOP2017
  8. (23) @ALOstasis: Cheers to a great conference. Eagerly awaiting next year in Chicago! #SIOP17
  9. (23) @BoArmstrong: If I fail my comps tomorrow, I might just stay in Orlando as a park attendant. #SIOP17
  10. (22) @chris_cerasoli: Congratulations to @EvanSinar on being awarded Fellow at #SIOP17 @SIOPtweets

Tweets with the Most Replies

  1. (6) @rnlanders: “IO is harder than rocket science.” Wow. Let’s see if we can pat our ourselves on the back even harder. #siop17
  2. (5) @DrCattell: Considering doing an informal “best poster award” from me & @HugoMunsterberg @ #SIOP17 Hugo, you down? Bless us with your esteemed criteria!
  3. (4) @KatherineSliter: Celebrated Friday night at #SIOP17 by getting vomited on by my baby. Four times. #parenting #nofunforme #lifewithkids
  4. (3) @MikeZickar: At the #SIOP17 session on social media, hoping that someone will stand up and say, “I am @HugoMunsterberg!”
  5. (3) @BoArmstrong: If I fail my comps tomorrow, I might just stay in Orlando as a park attendant. #SIOP17
  6. (3) @MikeZickar: Loved all the energy at #SIOP17 but good to have a little work recovery time. I hope you all can get a nap on the couch before Mon hits!
  7. (3) @IOSyIslam: Some last minute #SIOP17 preparation b4 my flight tomorrow Looking 4ward 2 seeing friends & colleagues at the premier #IOpsych conference!
  8. (3) @mchetta_phd: Why don’t we do a social media panel in on the panel that @surveyguy2 @TRPoeppelman @EvanSinar and others did at #SIOP17 ?
  9. (3) @HugoMunsterberg: When’s the best time to walk unannounced into “”100 Yrs of I-O Research”” to receive my unsolicited laurels? Beginning, middle or end? #SIOP17
  10. (3) @RMendelsonPhD: Already saw #TwitterFamous peeps at #SIOP17. @surveyguy2, @mchetta_phd, @MikeZickar, and @dwbracken. Where are @Aaron_Kraus and @IOSyIslam?
  11. (3) @allietumminia: What features of a person’s LinkedIn account make them more hireable? 1) Profile length 2) Profile picture & 3) # of connections #SIOP17
  12. (3) @BoArmstrong: Creativity = Fluency, Flexibility, & Originality, but is Originality not a circular definition of creativity? #SIOP17 Please explain.
  13. (3) @DrCattell: I’m broadening to all formats: So far we have: 1) “”Too many cooks”” 2) “”Redundant Again”” award 3) “”Worst joke in Title”” What else? #SIOP17″

SIOP 2017: Schedule Planning for IO Psychology Technology

2017 April 18
by Richard N. Landers

Every year, I post some screenshots of my insane schedule for seeing all of the technology-related content at SIOP.  Well, it’s finally happened. I can’t. There’s too much. In the past, I might miss a couple of double-booked sessions, but this year, two things happened:

  1. The technology program itself ballooned which means overlaps are everywhere. You can read more about its composition in this TIP article, but in short, there are about 40 sessions or posters on the program that specified technology as one of their core categories. This doesn’t even include people who didn’t set their category to technology despite talking heavily about technology.  Frankly, within the categories I identify below – gaming & gamification, UIT & mobile testing, adapting I/O to future technology, and methodology & measurement – you could have a quite full conference only attending presentations within that category!
  2. I am personally involved in 13 different events this year, so I barely have time to attend my own presentations!

So without further ado, here is a list of things to see and when/where to see them.

Note 1. Bolded sessions are ones my lab or I am involved in.

Note 2. Occasionally you’ll see a session marked (MP).  Almost all tech sessions were listed in the SIOP program as “mixed audience,” and only one (a poster in the Innovation session 123) was listed “mostly academic.”  The ones marked “mostly practitioner” are marked here as “MP.”

Note 3. If you want to meet up with me for any reason and haven’t scheduled a time yet, my schedule is almost booked solid, but I will be wandering around the Technology and Innovation Poster Session at 8:30AM on Friday, and I will probably get there a little early. My lab and I have four posters in the session. Drop by!

Technology Sessions at SIOP 2017, April 27-29 in Orlando, FLGaming and Gamification

  1. Thursday
    1. 53: Classroom Gamification: The Impact of Gamified Quizzes on Student Learning
      1:30PM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    2. 96: Gaming and Gamification IGNITE: Current Trends in Research an Application
      5:00PM, 50 minutes, N. Hemisphere E2
  2. Friday
    1. 123: Innovation and Technology Poster Session
      8:30AM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    2. 135: Game-based Assessment: Concepts and Insight from Research and Practice
      10:00AM, 80 minutes, N. Hemisphere E2
    3. 153: Serious Assessment Games and Gamified Assessment: Emerging Evidence
      11:30AM, 80 minutes, N. Hemisphere A3

UIT and Mobile Testing

  1. Thursday
    1. 45-19: Mobile Versus Desktop Assessments: Is There Really a Difference? (Poster)
      12:30PM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    2. 45-34: UIT Device-Type Score Differences: The Role of Working Memory (Poster)
      12:30PM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    3. 87-18: Swipe Right on Personality: A Mobile Response Latency Measure (Poster)
      4;30PM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
  2. Friday
    1. 110: Friday Seminar (separate fee): The Use of Mobile Devices in Employment-Related Testing and Assessment
      8:00AM, 180 minutes, N. Hemisphere A1
    2. 123: Innovation and Technology Poster Session
      8:30AM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    3. 130: Painting the Picture: What is the Mobile Test Environment? (Poster)
      10:00AM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    4. 173: Mobile Testing “In the Wild”: Apps, Reactions, Images, Criterion Validity
      1:00PM, 80 minutes, Australia 3
  3. Saturday
    1. 244: Assessments on Mobile Devices: Our Opportunities at Digital Speed (MP)
      8:00AM, 80 minutes, N. Hemisphere A4
    2. 279: Expanding Knowledge About Mobile Assessments Across Devices and Applicants
      11:30AM, 50 minutes, Asia 5
    3. 304: Mobile Assessment: Small Screens Become Mainstream (Demo & Panel Discussion) (MP)
      12:30PM, 50 minutes, N. Hemisphere E1

Adapting I/O to Future Technology

  1. Thursday
    1. 22: The Co-Bosts Are coming! Is I-O Ready?
      10:30AM, 50 minutes, S. Hemisphere V
    2. 36: Workplace Automation & the Future of IO Psychology
      12:00PM, 80 minutes, N. Hemisphere A4
    3. 60: Symposium + Panel Combo: Will Technology Make Assessment Obsolete?
      1:30PM, 80 minutes, N. Hemisphere E2
    4. 70: Fostering Collaboration Between Data/Computer Scientists and I-Os
      3:30PM, 50 minutes, Asia 3
  2. Friday
    1. 122: Science-Practice Exchange: Ready or not..Technology’s Implications for Leadership Development
      8:00AM, 80 minutes, S. Hemisphere V
    2. 123: Innovation and Technology Poster Session
      8:30AM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    3. 167: From Likes to Impact: The Payoffs of Social Media Involvement (MP)
      1:00PM, 80 minutes, Asia 1
    4. 196: Opportunities and Challenges in Electronic HRM
      3:00PM, 80 minutes, N. Hemisphere E1
    5. 207: Technology Trends Leading HR Practice: Key Opportunities for Research?
      400PM, 50 minutes, Asia 3
    6. 223: Executive Board Special Session: Simple, Social SIOP: Collaborating to Increase SIOP’s Social Media Reach
      5:00PM, 50 minutes, Asia 2
  3. Saturday
    1. 291: Integrations and Partnering with Technology: Experiences and Best Practices (MP)
      11:30AM, 80 minutes, S. Hemisphere IV
    2. 309: From the Outside, In: Technology’s Influence on I-O Psychology (MP)
      12:30PM, 50 minutes, S. Hemisphere II
    3. 311: The I-O of the Future: Identifying and Closing Skills Gaps
      12:30PM, 50 minutes, S. Hemisphere V
    4. 328: Alliance Special Session: The Impact of Technology on Recruitment and Selection: International Perspectives
      1:30PM, 50 minutes, N. Hemisphere E4
    5. 329: I-O Psychology in an IT World (MP)
      1:30PM, 50 minutes, S. Hemisphere I

Methodology and Measurement

  1. Thursday
    1. 25: Panel + Breakout Combo Session: Sense Making of Wearable Sensors
      11:30AM, 50 minutes, S. Hemisphere IV
    2. 44: Community of Interest: Inductive Research in I-O Psychology
      12:30PM, 50 minutes, Asia 3
    3. 53: Insufficient Effort Responding in MTurk Research: Evidence-Based Quality Control (Poster)
      1:30PM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    4. 53: Comparing MTurk and the U.S. Populations’ Occupational Diversity (Poster)
      1:30PM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    5. 53: Evaluating Online Data Quality: Response Speed and Response Consistency (Poster)
      1:30PM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    6. 157: Master Tutorial: Automated Data Collection: An Introduction to Web Scraping with Python
      11:30AM, 80 minutes, N. Hemisphere E3
  2. Friday
    1. 123: Innovation and Technology Poster Session
      8:30AM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    2. 130: Cheating on Online Cognitive Tests: Prevalence and Impact on Validity
      10:00AM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
    3. 193: Friday Seminar (separate fee): Automated Conversion of Social Media into Data: Demonstration and Tutorial
      3:00PM, 180 minutes, N. Hemisphere A2
  3. Saturday
    1. 239: I See What You Did there: Data Visualization in Action
      8:00AM, 80 minutes, S. Hemisphere I
    2. 259: Master Tutorial: Making Research Reproducible: Tutorial for Reproducible Research with R Markdown
      10:00AM, 80 minutes, Asia 4
    3. 265: Master Tutorial: R Shiny: Using Apps to Support I-O Research
      10:00AM, 80 minutes, N. Hemisphere A3
    4. 301: MTurk as Work (and Not Just a Recruitment Method)
      12:30PM, 50 minutes, N. Hemisphere A2
    5. 336: Using New metaBUS Functions to Facilitate Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
      3:00PM, 80 minutes, Asia 4
    6. 345: Data Visualization with R
      3:00PM, 80 minutes, S. Hemisphere I

Special/Other Topics

  1. 24-19: Examining the Relationship Between Engagement and Technology-Assisted Supplemental Work (Poster)
    Thursday, 11:30AM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
  2. 38: Caught on Video: Best Practices in One-Way Video Interviewing (MP)
    Thursday, 12:00PM, 80 minutes, N. Hemisphere E2
  3. 87-13: Predicting Personality with Social Media Behavior: A Meta-Analysis (Poster)
    Thursday, 4:30PM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
  4. 261-22: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Face-to-Face, Online, and Hybrid Ethics Courses (Poster)
    Saturday, 10:00AM, 50 minutes, Atlantic BC
  5. 268: Social Media for Employment Decisions: The Good, Bad, and Ugly
    Saturday, 10:00AM, 80 minutes, N. Hemisphere E2

Technology Poster Session

If you’d like to whet your appetite for the technology poster session, here are the titles you’ll see there (Friday, 8:30 AM, Atlantic BC):

  1. How Pay Affects Performance and Retention in Longitudinal Crowdsourced Research
  2. Aristotle, Kant, and Facebook? Implications of Social Media on Ethics
  3. Can Video Games Reduce Faking in Selection Assessments?
  4. Coworker Relationships Altered by Social Media: Posts, Pokes, and Problems
  5. Time Flies When Cognitive Tests Are Games
  6. Diversity and Group Creativity in an Online, Asynchronous Environment
  7. The Effect of Technology Use on Relationship and Network Development
  8. The Impact of Smartphone Usage on Perceptions of Work–Life Balance
  9. How Consistent Is the Impact of Devices on Working Memory?
  10. Crowdsourcing Hard-to-Reach I-O Psychology Populations: Feasibility and Psychometrics
  11. Increases in Applicant Pool Diversity Attributable to Unproctored Internet-Based Testing
  12. Creating Three-Dimensional Task–Technology Fit Scales
  13. Examination of Individual Differences in Preference in Pursuing Gamified Training
  14. Email Me! How Email Textual Cues Influence Perceptions
  15. Personality, Responsiveness, and Performance in Technology-Enabled Work Environments
  16. To Meet or Not to Meet: Preference for Electronic Communication
  17. Effects of Automated Technology on Experiences of Agency at Work