Call for Nominations and Entries 

2002 Awards for the Society for
Industrial and Organizational Psychology 

1. Nominations may be submitted by any member of SIOP, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychological Society, or by any person who is sponsored by a member of one of these organizations.

2. Only members of SIOP may be nominated for the award.

3. A current vita of the nominee should accompany the letter of nomination. In addition, the nominator should include materials that illustrate the contributions of the nominee. Supporting letters may be included as part of the nomination packet. The number of supporting letters for any given nomination should be between a minimum of three and a maximum of five.

4. Nominees who are nonrecipients of the Distinguished Scientific Contributions Award, Distinguished Professional Contributions Award, and Distinguished Service Contributions Award will be reconsidered annually for 2 years after their initial nomination.

5. Eight copies of all submission materials are required. Letters of nomination, vita, and all supporting letters (including at least three and no more than five) or materials must be received by June 1, 2001. 

Administrative Procedures

1. The SIOP Awards Committee will review the letters of nomination and all supporting materials of all nominees and make a recommendation concerning one or more nominees to the SIOP Executive Committee. Two or more nominees may be selected if their contributions are similarly distinguished.

2. The Executive Committee may either endorse or reject the recommendations of the Awards Committee, but may not substitute a nominee of its own.

3. In the absence of a nominee who is deemed deserving of the award by both the Awards Committee and the Executive Committee, the award may be withheld. 

The letter of nomination should address the following points: 

1. The general nature of the nominees contributions to the practice of I-O psychology.

2. The contributions that the nominee has made to either (a) the development of practices, procedures, and methods, or (b) the implementation of practices, procedures, and methods. If appropriate, contributions of both types should be noted.

3. If relevant, the extent to which there is scientifically sound evidence to support the effectiveness of the relevant practices, procedures, and methods of the nominee.

4. The impact of the nominees contributions on the practice of I-O psychology.

5. The stature of the nominee as a practitioner vis--vis other prominent practitioners in the field of I-O psychology.

6. The evidence or documentation that is available to support the contributions of the nominee. Nominators should provide more than mere testimonials about the impact of a nominees professional contributions.

7. The extent to which the nominee has disseminated information about his or her methods, procedures, and practices through publications, presentations, workshops, and so forth. The methods, procedures, and practices must be both available to and utilized by other practicing I-O psychologists.

8. The organizational setting(s) of the nominees work (industry, government, academia, etc.) will not be a factor in selecting a winner of the award.

The letter of nomination should address the following issues: 

1. The general nature of the nominees scientific contributions.

2. The most important theoretical and/or empirical contributions.

3. The impact of the nominees contributions on the science of I-O psychology, including the impact that the work has had on the work of students and colleagues.

4. The stature of the nominee as a scientist vis--vis other prominent scientists in the field of I-O psychology.

The letter of nomination should address the nature and quality of the nominees service contributions. A detailed history of the individuals service-oriented contributions should be provided. It should specify: 

1. The offices held by the nominee.

2. The duration of his or her service in each such office.

3. The significant achievements of the nominee while an incumbent in each office.

 

The letter of nomination should address the following issues: 

1. The general nature of the nominees contributions to science and/or practice.

2. The most important contributions to science and/or practice.

3. The impact of the nominees contribution on the science and/or practice of I-O psychology, including the impact that the work has had on the work of students and colleagues.

4. The status of the nominee as a scientist and/or practitioner vis--vis other prominent scientists and/or practitioners in the field of I-O psychology.

5. While the number of publications is an important consideration, it is not the only one. An equally important criteria is the quality of the publications and their impact on the field of I-O psychology.

Documentation should be provided that indicates that the nominee received his or her PhD degree no earlier than 1995.

Dissertation summaries will be evaluated in terms of the following criteria: 

1. The degree to which the research addresses a phenomenon that is of significance to the field of I-O psychology.

2. The extent to which the research shows appropriate consideration of relevant theoretical and empirical literature. This should be reflected in both the formulation of hypotheses tested and the selection of methods used in their testing.

3. The degree to which the research has produced findings that have high levels of validity (i.e., internal, external, construct, and statistical conclusion). The setting of the proposed research is of lesser importance than its ability to yield highly valid conclusions about a real-world phenomenon of relevance to the field of I-O psychology. Thus, the methods of the research (including subjects, procedures, measures, manipulations, and data analytic strategies) should be specified in sufficient detail to allow for an assessment of the capacity of the proposed research to yield valid inferences.

4. The extent to which the author (a) offers reasonable interpretations of the results of his or her research, (b) draws appropriate inferences about the theoretical and applied implications of the same results, and (c) suggests promising directions for future research.

5. The degree to which the research yields information that is both practically and theoretically relevant and important.

6. The extent to which ideas in the proposal are logically, succinctly, and clearly presented.

1. Entries may be submitted only by individuals who are endorsed (sponsored) by a member of SIOP, the American Psychological Society, or the American Psychological Association.

2. Each entrant should submit 10 copies of their paper (not to exceed 30 pages of double-spaced text) based on his or her dissertation. The name of the entrant, institutional affiliation, current mailing address, and phone number should appear only on the title page of the paper.

3. Papers are limited to a maximum of 30 double-spaced pages. This limit includes the title page, abstract, text, tables, figures, and appendices. However, it excludes references.

4. Papers should be prepared in accord with the guidelines provided in the fourth edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. Note, however, that the abstract may contain up to 300 words.

5. The paper must be based on a dissertation that was accepted by the graduate college 2 years or less before June 1, 2001, with the stipulation than an entrant may only submit once.

6. The entrant must provide a letter from his or her dissertation chair that specifies the date of acceptance of the dissertation by the graduate school of the institution and that the submission adequately represents all aspects of the completed dissertation. In addition, the entrant must provide a letter of endorsement from a member of SIOP, the American Psychology Society, or the American Psychological Association who is familiar with the entrants dissertation. Both of these letters may be from the same individual.

7. Entries (accompanied by supporting letters) must be received by June 1, 2001. 

1. All entries will be reviewed by the Awards Committee of SIOP.

2. The Awards Committee will make a recommendation to the Executive Committee of SIOP about the award-winning dissertation and, if appropriate, up to two dissertations deserving honorable mention status.

3. The Executive Committee may either endorse or reject the recommendations of the Awards Committee, but may not substitute recommendations of its own.

4. In the absence of a dissertation that is deemed deserving of the award by both the Awards Committee and the Executive Committee, the award may be withheld.

Publications will be evaluated in terms of the following criteria: 

1. The degree to which the research addresses a phenomenon that is of significance to the field of I-O psychology.

2. The potential impact or significance of the publication to the field of I-O psychology.

3. The degree to which the research displays technical adequacy, including issues of internal validity, external validity, appropriate methodology, appropriate statistical analysis, comprehensiveness of review (if the publication is a literature review), and so forth. 

1. Publications may be submitted by any member of SIOP, the American Psychological Society, the American Psychological Association, or by any person who is sponsored by a member of one of these organizations. Self- and other-nominations are welcome. The Owens Award subcommittee may also generate nominations. Those evaluating the publications will be blind to the source of the nomination.

2. Publications having multiple authors are acceptable.

3. Ten copies of each publication should be submitted.

4. Publications must be received by June 1, 2001. 

1. Publications will be reviewed by a subcommittee of the Awards Committee of SIOP, consisting of at least six members.

2. The Awards Committee will make a recommendation to the Executive Committee of SIOP about the award-winning publication and, if appropriate, a publication deserving honorable mention status.

3. The Executive Committee may either endorse or reject the recommendations of the Awards Committee but may not substitute a nominee of its own.

4. In the absence of a publication that is deemed deserving of the award by both the Awards Committee and the Executive Committee, the award may be withheld. 

Nominations will be evaluated on the extent to which they: 

1. Have a sound technical/scientific basis.

2. Advance objectives of clients/users.

3. Promote full use of human potential.

4. Comply with applicable psychological, legal, and ethical standards.

5. Improve the acceptance of I-O psychology in the workplace.

6. Show innovation and excellence. 

1. Nominations may be submitted by any member of SIOP. Self-nominations are welcome.

2. Individuals or teams may be nominated. Each individual nominee must be a current member of the Society. If a team is nominated, at least one of the team members must be a current member of the Society, and each team member must have made a significant contribution to the project or product.

3. Each nomination package must contain the following information: 

(a) A letter of nomination which explains how the project or product meets the six evaluation criteria above.

(b) A technical report which describes the project or product in detail. This may be an existing report.

(c) A description of any formal complaints of a legal or ethical nature which have been made regarding the project or product.

(d) A list of three client references who may be contacted by the Myers Award subcommittee regarding the project or product.

(e) (Optional) Any other documentation which may be helpful for evaluating the nomination (e.g., a sample of the product, technical manuals, independent evaluations).

4. Six copies of all nomination materials should be submitted. The Awards Committee will maintain the confidentiality of secure materials.

5. Nominations must be received by June 1, 2001. 

1. Nomination materials will be reviewed by a subcommittee of the SIOP Awards Committee, consisting of at least three members, all of whom work primarily as I-O practitioners.

2. The Awards Committee will make a recommendation to the SIOP Executive Committee about the award-winning project or product.

3. The Executive Committee may either accept or reject the recommendation of the Awards Committee, but may not substitute a nominee of its own.

4. In the absence of a nominee that is deemed deserving of the award by both the Awards Committee and the Executive Committee, the award may be withheld. 

1986 Craig Russell and Mary Van Sell 

1989 Kathy Hanisch and Charles Hulin 

2000 Kristen Horgen, Mary Ann Hanson, Walter Borman, and Chris Kubisiak

1994 Talya Bauer and Lynda Aiman-Smith

Distinguished Scientific Award for an Early Career Contribution to Psychology 

April 2001 Table of Contents | TIP Home | SIOP Home