针对多个少数子群和多个准则设计pareto最优选择系统。

IF 9.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Journal of Applied Psychology Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-26 DOI:10.1037/apl0001145
Wilfried De Corte, Paul R Sackett, Filip Lievens
{"title":"针对多个少数子群和多个准则设计pareto最优选择系统。","authors":"Wilfried De Corte, Paul R Sackett, Filip Lievens","doi":"10.1037/apl0001145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Currently used Pareto-optimal (PO) approaches for balancing diversity and validity goals in selection can deal only with one minority group and one criterion. These are key limitations because the workplace and society at large are getting increasingly diverse and because selection system designers often have interest in multiple criteria. Therefore, the article extends existing methods for designing PO selection systems to situations involving multiple criteria and multiple minority groups (i.e., multiobjective PO selection systems). We first present a hybrid multiobjective PO approach for computing selection systems that are PO with respect to (a) a set of quality objectives (i.e., criteria) and (b) a set of diversity objectives where each diversity objective relates to a different minority group. Next, we propose three two-dimensional subspace procedures that aid selection designers in choosing between the PO systems in case of a high number of quality and diversity objectives. We illustrate our novel multiobjective PO approaches via several example applications, thereby demonstrating that they are the first to reveal the complete gamut of eligible PO selection designs and to faithfully capture the Pareto trade-off front in case of more than two objectives. In addition, a small-scale cross-validation study confirms that the resulting PO selection designs retain an advantage over alternative designs when applied in new validation samples. Finally, the article provides a link to an executable code to perform the new multiobjective PO approaches. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"513-533"},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Designing pareto-optimal selection systems for multiple minority subgroups and multiple criteria.\",\"authors\":\"Wilfried De Corte, Paul R Sackett, Filip Lievens\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/apl0001145\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Currently used Pareto-optimal (PO) approaches for balancing diversity and validity goals in selection can deal only with one minority group and one criterion. These are key limitations because the workplace and society at large are getting increasingly diverse and because selection system designers often have interest in multiple criteria. Therefore, the article extends existing methods for designing PO selection systems to situations involving multiple criteria and multiple minority groups (i.e., multiobjective PO selection systems). We first present a hybrid multiobjective PO approach for computing selection systems that are PO with respect to (a) a set of quality objectives (i.e., criteria) and (b) a set of diversity objectives where each diversity objective relates to a different minority group. Next, we propose three two-dimensional subspace procedures that aid selection designers in choosing between the PO systems in case of a high number of quality and diversity objectives. We illustrate our novel multiobjective PO approaches via several example applications, thereby demonstrating that they are the first to reveal the complete gamut of eligible PO selection designs and to faithfully capture the Pareto trade-off front in case of more than two objectives. In addition, a small-scale cross-validation study confirms that the resulting PO selection designs retain an advantage over alternative designs when applied in new validation samples. Finally, the article provides a link to an executable code to perform the new multiobjective PO approaches. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15135,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"513-533\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001145\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001145","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前使用的帕累托最优(PO)方法在选择中平衡多样性和有效性目标,只能处理一个少数群体和一个标准。这些都是关键的局限性,因为工作场所和整个社会正变得越来越多样化,而且选拔系统设计师往往对多种标准感兴趣。因此,本文将现有的PO选择系统设计方法扩展到涉及多个标准和多个少数群体的情况(即多目标PO选择系统)。我们首先提出了一种混合多目标PO方法,用于计算相对于(a)一组质量目标(即标准)和(b)一组多样性目标为PO的选择系统,其中每个多样性目标与不同的少数群体有关。接下来,我们提出了三个二维子空间过程,以帮助选择设计者在具有大量质量和多样性目标的情况下在PO系统之间进行选择。我们通过几个示例应用说明了我们新的多目标PO方法,从而证明了它们是第一个揭示合格PO选择设计的完整范围的方法,并在两个以上目标的情况下忠实地捕捉Pareto权衡前沿。此外,一项小规模的交叉验证研究证实,当应用于新的验证样本时,由此产生的PO选择设计比替代设计保持优势。最后,本文提供了一个可执行代码的链接,以执行新的多目标PO方法。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Designing pareto-optimal selection systems for multiple minority subgroups and multiple criteria.

Currently used Pareto-optimal (PO) approaches for balancing diversity and validity goals in selection can deal only with one minority group and one criterion. These are key limitations because the workplace and society at large are getting increasingly diverse and because selection system designers often have interest in multiple criteria. Therefore, the article extends existing methods for designing PO selection systems to situations involving multiple criteria and multiple minority groups (i.e., multiobjective PO selection systems). We first present a hybrid multiobjective PO approach for computing selection systems that are PO with respect to (a) a set of quality objectives (i.e., criteria) and (b) a set of diversity objectives where each diversity objective relates to a different minority group. Next, we propose three two-dimensional subspace procedures that aid selection designers in choosing between the PO systems in case of a high number of quality and diversity objectives. We illustrate our novel multiobjective PO approaches via several example applications, thereby demonstrating that they are the first to reveal the complete gamut of eligible PO selection designs and to faithfully capture the Pareto trade-off front in case of more than two objectives. In addition, a small-scale cross-validation study confirms that the resulting PO selection designs retain an advantage over alternative designs when applied in new validation samples. Finally, the article provides a link to an executable code to perform the new multiobjective PO approaches. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
175
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including: 1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses). 2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research. 3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.
期刊最新文献
Prospects for reducing group mean differences on cognitive tests via item selection strategies. Self-promotion in entrepreneurship: A driver for proactive adaptation. Coping with work-nonwork stressors over time: A person-centered, multistudy integration of coping breadth and depth. A person-centered approach to behaving badly at work: An examination of workplace deviance patterns. How perceived lack of benevolence harms trust of artificial intelligence management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1