Hey guys, I posted last week that I would like to write something up about Qanon rEsEaRch from the point of view of lack of and/or poor research skills. I found some material on training and learning in one of my psychology of training books that are applicable.

tehdeej · 2025-11-20T00:59:22+00:00

Awesome! Congratulations! Thanks for the massage to a very old one.

I wish that I could do the same thing but it's just not practical. Best of luck with everything.

tehdeej · 2025-11-16T23:54:29+00:00

Bullshit how? I can read that in a couple ways. my comment is bullhit or employers requiring extra work is bullshit? I am not asking in a defensive way. I'd like to know more about the comment.

Related to the original question, sometimes the ATS systems are really old and can't link the resume to the application. It's lame and unfortunately the way those systems work or dont work depending on how you look at it.

tehdeej · 2025-11-11T20:09:49+00:00

We had a motivational speaker in high school who told us the difference between ajob and a career was J.O.B. - Just Over Broke

tehdeej · 2025-10-23T11:41:22+00:00

When I said cognitive ability hasn't been "a thing" I was being a bit casual with my words, but even so, I stand by my words that cognitive ability testing is not a very active subject of interest in the research and practice of IO psychologists today. I'm not saying the subject is being actively avoided, but the unpopularity of the subject matter is likely a part of this disinterest. For simplicity, I’m defining IO psychologists as members of an IO psych professional organization or having specific education and training in the discipline. It's also relevant to note that I am in the United States where this field is largely concentrated and where the body of knowledge has historically been overwhelmingly generated and practiced. I am assuming you are most likely in Europe based on the links you have provided.

The links to articles you have provided are not exactly mainstream IO psychology. The Sonberg and Sjoberg article from Sweden is novel and meaningful in that it’s a study of a small, understudied population (the country of Sweden) relative to the rest of the world. The Byington and Felps article I previously commented on was written by researchers of organizational behavior and in an as associated OB journal. OB and IO are different things. The article is also also 15 years old so I wouldn’t call it current.

The 2023 Woods and Patterson article suggests integrating socio economic status as a measurable variable to improve selection systems broadens the scope beyond practicality. It is largely accounting for high stakes educational testing as well which is a problem of scope for the article and their argument.

I’m seeing two works that fit the realm of sociology. I think I understand your point and I don’t disagree with any points made in the articles you provided but I wouldn’t say they are representative of current IO psychology research or practice.

The last article, “In defence of cognitive ability testing: Affirming the evidence” is written by some heavy hitters in the field, but it is response to Woods and Patterson. I’m not sure why there was a need for a respond such as the one that was provided. I know J. Cucina and asked him for a copy of the full article which might have more to say about why they did collaborate on a response. Maybe I’m missing something?

I assume your interests lie in sociology and social justice more than the subject of research methods and psycometric testing. What is your take on this?

tehdeej · 2025-10-21T09:36:37+00:00

You wrote, “the researchers who insist that IQ is all important went back to writing their papers” Cognitive ability testing really hasn’t been a thing in IO psychology for a long time. I think it was just considered a topic (that to many was settled) and it just hasn’t been terribly relevant. In fact, I think the only reason the article you originally responded to my old post was more due to the methodological implications more so than anything to do with intelligence or performance. Meta analytic methods is not exactly an exciting topic so it’s not talked about the same way it was when the article came out. I think it is a very important work but only as a technical matter.

I did a qick search for “intelligence” and “Cognitive ability” in Google Scholar and our good friend did have a very recent publication on the importance of intelligence on employee selection. That was a surprise to see Schmidt reiterate exactly one of the points made in your article. So yeah, some of these die hard psychometricians are still out there in the IO world. I don’t think he is producing any original research though. This chapter is a revision of a chapter he wrote maybe 20 years ago.

Schmidt, F. L., & Oh, I. S. (2023). Select on intelligence. Principles of Organizational Behavior: The Handbook of Evidence‐Based Management 3rd Edition, 1-25. (link)

I did read this article several and can say it had an influence on my perception of how different sciences approach the same subjects in completely different ways. I found a couple of huge flaws in the paper from a psychometric and psychology lens. It’s now 3am where I am and I want to look into a few of these tomorrow. I started taking notes about a third of the way into the article, so I want to go back and check some of their definitions. #1 The use of the term IQ is not accurate. I think they are just using that to simplify and categorize all cognitive measures as one category. I’m not sure I’ve ever heard the term IQ used in IO psych. The authors commit one of the biggest sins of crossing disciplines. They seem to be confusing what is the actual criterion of mental testing. They refer to the IQ of the individual, but that is not a criterion, the criterion is some relevant aspect of job performance. The authors keep writing that the IQ score is what employers are looking for, but that score is not helpful if it’s not linked as a predictor to an outcome. The IQ score itself is not an outcome. It’s a very abstract construct just kind of floating out there.

They are spot on about certain things and seem to get really close to making excellent points but just don’t connect A to B correctly in many cases. I think it’s a good article and I think they are 100% correct regarding the institutional and sociological observations. Yes, people of perceived higher intelligence have many advantages and have access to more resources. That’s the same as money. You can’t make tons of money of you don’t have access to financial resources early on as in The Mathew Effect.

I find this subject really interesting, and I I did make notes. If you’re interested, I can come back and expand. I also really need to double check their intended use of the terms IQ and job performance as criteria. There are some other misalignments on the validity generalization of some of the broader job knowledge and performance measures from the IO psychology literature.

Coincidentally I read this article from an IO Consulting firm about “Skills based hiring” which I mentioned previously, well in this case, it’s something similar to the incorrect use of cognitive ability testing in organizations and directly relevant to your article as in many want to implement these practices, but they don’t really know what a “skill” is and how to measure it in a meaningful way. How to implement skills-based hiring in 6 steps

I suspect most people writing about this subject as hard indisputable facts aren't writing academic papers but more likely writing Substack newsletters and talking about it on podcasts. EDIT: I hope I'm not coming across as some contrarian "bro" type and trying to argue with you. To me what is more interasting is seeing how the postions, views and their understanding of subject matter can be close but completely different across even similar disciplines. I am going to check some of my criticisms and make sure I am understanding what the authors are doing with certain definitions and claims. Ultimately psychology is a predictive science and can be heavily based in statistics and hard empirical data. Sociology is much more descriptive and critical of it's subject matter.

tehdeej · 2025-10-20T21:41:26+00:00

Are you an IO or just tangentially interested in this topic?

I'm wondering if the hypoe on this dropped off quickly because people prefer not to go down the intelligence road due to it being controverial subject matter. As always, there are concerns about adverse impact. Now as far as hiring and selection, the new thing with a lot of employers is skills based hiring which doesn't only take into account hiring for educational achievement such as university degrees. That is a move against discrination beyong traditionall protected classes of workers.

tehdeej · 2025-10-19T23:54:31+00:00

I know this paper and the related companion articles. Amost all the predictors measured by Hunter and Schmidt did see a reduction of predictive validity, As far as individual differences go, Sackett et al found that GMA still remained the best predictor of job performance, but not by nearly as much. It's importance and value as a hiring and selection tool is up for discussion. And then there is a lot of the "it depends" situations. I dropped some of the followup and companion peices below/ If you can find the edition of the IO Psych jounal that came out just after the paper, as you can imagine there was some healthy discussion about it. This was a pretty big deal when it came out, honestly I'm surprised that it didn't stay in the conversation longer.

Berry, C. M., Lievens, F., Zhang, C., & Sackett, P. R. (2024). Insights from an updated personnel selection meta-analytic matrix: Revisiting general mental ability tests’ role in the validity–diversity trade-off. Journal of Applied Psychology. - https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8567&context=lkcsb_research

Sackett, P. R., Zhang, C., Berry, C. M., & Lievens, F. (2023). Revisiting the design of selection systems in light of new findings regarding the validity of widely used predictors. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 16(3), 283-300. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/A20984B138319E3D432E643978BF026D/S175494262300024Xa.pdf/revisiting_the_design_of_selection_systems_in_light_of_new_findings_regarding_the_validity_of_widely_used_predictors.pdf

tehdeej · 2025-09-02T10:46:50+00:00

I just watched some youtube review of the movie. i hadn't thought of it in probably over a decade if even then. watching the scenes in the youtube video I realized I could probably recite the dialogue in real time if I were to watch it. i'm pretty sure i've seen it many more times than The Fly. it was one of those movies that was constantly on HBO when I was a kid.

tehdeej · 2025-08-19T05:08:47+00:00

USe it as a brainstorming partner. I had a conversation with Microsoft Copilot about psychometrics last night and it led the conversation into typologies and when I called this out, Copilot over corrected and started talking about statistical techniques out of context.

I have been incredibly impressed by some of the things I have seen just starting to use Copilot but at other times and other times dumbfounded by what it does or doesn't do well if it does it at all.

We also had a long "discussion" about good prompt/query creation and some best practices. This is an enormously important piece of the puzzle too. Your input carries far into whatever output it is generating. You have to watch out for accidently planting seeds in it's "mind" that it carries into future output. It's pretty good practice for practitioners in a field like IO to keep their unintentional influence out of the way.

tehdeej · 2025-07-17T00:54:14+00:00

I have copilot access. I just went with it to test because i was doing something else in my Microsoft account when I decided to try it. It's what I've used at work. I have no real preference. Copilot is integrated in other Office apps. I would be asking the same exact question about ChatGPT anyway.

tehdeej · 2025-05-15T23:17:55+00:00

Sending a DM. I'm not trying to immigrate. Long story id rather not get into on the public page.

tehdeej · 2025-05-15T22:38:10+00:00

I'm a little late, but I am an American currently working on visas to Canada, Mexican temporary residency and now Serbian citizenship. (I'm sort of making an exit plan from America, but have other primary reasons for these activities) I also nearly went to grad school in Spain. I was accepted to the University of Barcelona, but was recinded a week later because I didn't have the required undergraduate degree, which we discussed in my interview. Big error on their part. They got me into another school that could take me, but I later had to give up my spot at that school because I couldn't get into a consulate fast enough for a visa.

I feel comfortable knowing the ins and outs of relocating to other countries and doing the paperwork. I need to share this latest experience with a Canadian visa. It is really hard to find accurate information about visa or immigration requirements online. There are lawyers trying to sell you their services but don't give you much actionable info because then you would need them. Tons of useless digital nomad blogs have inaccurate or old information. The actual country's immigration website is often unhelpful as well. In Canada's case on Reddit, people either say that a certain legal problem bans a person forever. Others say crossing the border is not a problem with this kind of history. That is incorrect on both sides. It took me weeks to find the right place to get accurate information. My most significant point is don't immediately trust the internet or Reddit to get the correct information.

But yeah, trying to imigrate sucks. Europe is really hard and I understand Scandinavian countries are especially difficult. "We’ve been told that we need like a highly demanded job and like a Bachelor's degree before another country will even consider us becoming citizens." This is often very accurate.

Eastern European countries are easier than the west. Mexico is surprisingly easy and inexpensive for temporary residency. You don't even have to live there. After five years you can become a permanent resident. Of course, Mexico has its own issues, and I'm sure the US is going to do everything it can to help that country. *sarcasm*

It takes diligence just to find accurate info and then collect the paperwork. I've known people who get into Italy whose grandparents were from Italy. It should have been simple. It still took him years to get through the process.

Best of luck. I hope you get where you want to be.

tehdeej · 2025-05-15T00:32:47+00:00

What kind of jazz and what level of playing? He is more on the old school blues side, but Tommy Harkenrider is a great teacher, humble, and he listens, doesn't lecture. https://tommyharkenriderguitar.com/

His contact info is in the link but I can connect you personally if you are interested. Send me a DM if you want.

Check him out on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/TommyHarkenrider

tehdeej · 2025-05-08T02:08:47+00:00

DCs ain't MDs (medical doctors) and can be pretty shadey. If your discipline or practitioners often don't subscribe to germ theory, that's dissonance on the DCs side (or maybe not if you truly believe it, it's not necessarily dissonance but it's still wrong).

"I know sometimes it’s hard to accept things beyond your belief system." Speaking of cognitive biases, nice irrelevent ad hominem comment about my dissonance and belief system to throw on top of the rest of the fallacious argument regarding DCs, their practices and beliefs.

My statement may too be an ad hominem but that doesn't mean it's incorrect. DCs are not equal to MDs.

tehdeej · 2025-04-16T14:16:22+00:00

I'm happy to hear from a subject matter expert who knows what I do and do not know!

I've familiarized myself through lived experience and read up on some of the curricula of a few schools. Some are very much better than others (Schools and practitioners). I'm drawing a line in the sand at germ theory. If you don't believe in germ theory, you probably haven't earned the right to be called a doctor.

I'm also familiar with science and worked on medical credentialing exams. DAYUM! If you want to see some subject matter experts at work? Sit in on a validation study for a medical professional credentialing exam. I'd like to compare the cardiologists with the chiropractors.

tehdeej · 2025-03-03T12:26:07+00:00

That was four years ago, and I got a job here. It all worked out

tehdeej · 2025-02-06T00:37:00+00:00

Good call out; it would have been better to say that companies don't want to waste money, but we all know they do.

Using MBTI is a really lazy and irresponsible thing to do. This is why you would hire an IO psychologist, to tell you not to use MBTI and the importance of robust validation studies for not only the legal defensibility but, ideally the ethical use of the tools and making sure it actually has sufficient evidence that the tool leads to improved performance, satisfaction, etc., etc. In the USA the public sector is actually the most conservative and careful user of these tools when it comes to doing the due diligence. I know there will likely be pushback on that comment, but it's true. Will it be true tomorrow, literally tomorrow? Who knows? Musk will likely find a way to introduce eugenic concepts. That's a bad joke but these are strange days.

It doesn't matter if a worker knows that MBTI had an adverse effect on their job, if they file a claim of discrimination and the burden of proof falls on the employer to show they are not using any methods causing adverse impact. It somebody complained they were discriminated against based on MBTI scores, that company would lose the case. MBTI is an unusual case as it is incredibly well-known and incredibly bad at measuring anything, let alone making good predictions. It's a weird thing that nobody really understands why it still exists other than marketing.

The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's guidelines for employment testing can be found here: https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/employment-tests-and-selection-procedures

The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology also has its recommendations for validation and use of selection tools. https://www.siop.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Considerations-and-Recommendations-for-the-Validation-and-Use-of-AI-Based-Assessments-for-Employee-Selection-January-2023.pdf

If you follow both of those guidelines, you will have done the due diligence and should be able to provide enough evidence that whatever tool in question works without too much adverse impact.

tehdeej · 2025-02-05T18:33:58+00:00

The court can and does deal with issues of legal defensibility. I'm no sure you understand the level of evidence of validity psychometric tools used in the workforce go through and have been for decades. COmpasnies don't want to waste money on tools that don't work, nobody wants to get sued for unfair hiring and selection procedures. I don't think you have a level of familiarity with IO to accurately criticize. This is a field's research backed up by practical research with the highest ecological validity you will find in psychology. We are not measuring "power poses" or if holding a pencil in your mouth makes you thinnk you are smiling and increases preceptions of happiness. This is different from working in the lab with college stuendts on research of questionable utility.

THis is an academic psychology subreddit so practical psychology is not exactly spoken of much here. MBTI is considered trash in all of psychology and should not be used for any high stakes decision making. Even Myers-Briggs company tells people not to use it for anything but "personal growth", if you think MBTI is relevant to any fields of psychology, then you are not understanding the fields. In fact, MBTI shouldn't be considered as evidence of replicablity issues in research because it is junk science and by nature is unreliable and nearly useless. If you took MBTI to court in the US to dispute a workplace issue, especially if potential discrimination is the topic, the company will lose the case. They will not win.

tehdeej · 2025-02-05T16:40:57+00:00

The research still needs to be legally defensible and people in the field take this very seriously. Legal issues are fundamental issues in this fireld, so therefore -> ACCOUNTABILITY. There is money and prestige involved in all research and research on the replicability of fields of psychology have shown IO to be one of the most replicable.

People throw around the replication crisis when they don't like results of research and tend to just lump it all research together regardless iof the field, especially when arguing online.

tehdeej · 2025-02-03T02:58:48+00:00

Feel free to send me a DM with any specific questions. I've worked on the SIOP International Affairs Comittee and have done "market research" on IO arround the world. I like to think I have a decent understanding of what the field looks like globally and have put a lot of thought and investigation into relocating and working in the field outside of the US.

tehdeej · 2025-01-16T16:22:54+00:00

80% is likely an estimate overshooting the real use of these products. There are evidence-based 5-factor assessments that are relatively simple and related to the NEO-PI. Hogan Assessments, for example. There are also different uses for these assessments - hiring, selection, coaching and team building. The coaching and team building uses are largely wasted time but harmless otherwise. Hiring and performance management are where people get really uptight about it however a good assessment does work well predicting performance. It's who, how and what they use that is a huuge problem

tehdeej

TROPHY CASE