The effects of heteroscedasticity on tests of equivalence

Tests of equivalence, which are designed to assess the similarity of group means, are becoming more popular, yet very little is known about the statistical properties of these tests. Monte Carlo methods are used to compare the test of equivalence proposed by Schuirmann with modified tests of equivalence that incorporate a heteroscedastic error term. It was found that the latter were more accurate than the Schuirmann test in detecting equivalence when sample sizes and variances were unequal.Social Sciences and Humanities Research Counci

Recommendations for applying tests of equivalence

Researchers in psychology reliably select traditional null hypothesis significance tests (e.g., Student's t test), regardless of whether the research hypothesis relates to whether the group means are equivalent or whether the group means are different. Tests of equivalence, which have been popular in biopharmaceutical studies for years, have recently been introduced and recommended to researchers in psychology for demonstrating the equivalence of two group means. However, very few recommendations exist for applying tests of equivalence. A Monte Carlo study was used to compare the test of equivalence proposed by Schuirmann with the traditional Student t test for deciding if two group means are equivalent. It was found that Schuirmann's test of equivalence is more effective than Student's t test at detecting population mean equivalence with large sample sizes; however, Schuirmann's test of equivalence performs poorly relative to Student's t test with small sample sizes and/or inflated variances.Social Sciences and Humanities Research Counci

Employee engagement, human resource management practices and competitive advantage

AbstractPurpose - The purpose of this paper is to argue in support of a model that shows how four key HRM practices focused on engagement influence organizational climate, job demands and job resources, the psychological experiences of safety, meaningfulness and availability at work, employee engagement, and individual, group and organizational performance and competitive advantage.Design/methodology/approach - This conceptual review focuses on the research evidence showing interrelationships between organizational context factors, job factors, individual employee psychological and motivational factors, employee outcomes, organizational outcomes and competitive advantage. The proposed model integrates frameworks that have previously run independently in the HR and engagement literatures.Findings - The authors conclude that HRM practitioners need to move beyond the routine administration of annual engagement surveys and need to embed engagement in HRM policies and practices such personnel selection, socialization, performance management, and training and development.Practical implications - The authors offer organizations clear guidelines for how HR practices (i.e. selection, socialization, performance management, training) can be used to facilitate and improve employee engagement and result in positive outcomes that will help organizations achieve a competitive advantage.Originality/value - The authors provide useful new insights for researchers and management professionals wishing to embed engagement within the fabric of HRM policies and practices and employee behaviour, and organizational outcomes.<br /

Equivalence tests for one-way independent groups designs

Researchers in education are often interested in determining whether independent groups are equivalent on a specific outcome. Equivalence tests for 2 independent populations have been widely discussed, whereas testing for equivalence with more than 2 independent groups has received little attention. The authors discuss alternatives for testing the equivalence of more than 2 independent populations, and the use a Monte Carlo study to demonstrate and compare the performance of these alternatives under several conditions. The results indicate that a 1-way test (e.g., Wellek’s F test) is recommended for assessing the equivalence of more than 2 independent groups because approaches based on conducting pairwise tests of equivalence are overly conservative.Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC

Applied social psychology, 2nd ed./ Edit.: Frank W. Schneider

xiii, p. 486: ill.; 25 c