• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of organizational behavior >Frequency versus time lost measures of absenteeism: Is the voluntariness distinction an urban legend?
【24h】

Frequency versus time lost measures of absenteeism: Is the voluntariness distinction an urban legend?

机译：旷工的频率与时间损失的度量：自愿性区别是城市传说吗？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

We investigate a long-standing methodological rule of thumb, the idea that the frequency of absenteeism from work approximates an expression of voluntary behavior while total time lost better reflects involuntary behavior and ill health. Conducting original meta-analyses and using results from existing meta-analyses, we determine that time lost and frequency are equally reliable, that the relationship between them approximates unity when corrections for measurement artifacts are applied, and that there is very little evidence for differential criterion-related validity predicated on the voluntariness distinction. We supply new meta-analytic estimates of the reliability of absenteeism adjusted for aggregation period and determine that most extant meta-analyses of the correlates of absenteeism have markedly under-corrected for unreliability. Our results question the basic construct validity of the time lost-frequency distinction, and they contradict the practice of using "trigger points" that factor absence frequency into attendance monitoring and associated discipline systems so as to discourage short-term absenteeism, assumed to be volitional. We conclude that the idea that time lost and frequency reflect different degrees of voluntariness is an unsupported urban research legend. Copyright (c) 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
机译：我们研究了一种长期的方法学经验法则，即旷工的频率近似于自愿行为的表达，而总的时间损失则更好地反映了非自愿行为和健康状况。进行原始的荟萃分析并使用现有荟萃分析的结果，我们确定时间损失和频率同样可靠，当应用测量伪影进行校正时，它们之间的关系近似为1，并且几乎没有证据表明差分标准相关性的有效性取决于自愿性差异。我们提供了针对聚集期调整的旷工可靠性的新的荟萃分析估计，并确定旷工相关性的大多数现存荟萃分析已针对不可靠性进行了明显的不足校正。我们的结果质疑时间丢失频率区分的基本构造有效性，并且与使用“触发点”将缺勤频率纳入考勤监控和相关学科系统的做法相抵触，从而阻止了短期缺勤（被认为是自愿的） 。我们得出的结论是，时间损失和频率反映不同程度的自愿性的想法是不受支持的城市研究传奇。版权所有（c）2015 John Wiley＆Sons，Ltd.

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号