The Schmidt-Hunter Meta-Analysis Award, honoring Frank L. Schmidt and John E. Hunter, recognizes the best advances related to I-O psychology from a meta-analysis published in the last three years. The meta-analysis should exhibit the highest-level of methodological and general conceptual or theoretical quality and yield potential implications for I-O psychology.
The meta-analysis can be in any area of I-O psychology or in another discipline or sub-discipline if there are potential implications for I-O psychology, even if such implications are long term or remote. Articles that make important contributions to statistical, measurement, and mathematical methods can only be submitted if they include actual meta-analysis using real data. The emphasis in this award is on methodological and theoretical quality, rather than on established impact on the field of I-O psychology. This provision recognizes that sufficient time for showing impact will typically not have elapsed at the time of nomination.
Award recipients receive a plaque and a $3,000 cash prize (to be split in the case of multiple authors).
Administrative Procedures
- At least five members of the SIOP Awards Subcommittee will review and evaluate each nomination package.
- The Awards Subcommittee members should be current SIOP members with a reputation for knowledge of meta-analysis methods. Earlier award winners may serve on the committee.
- The Awards Subcommittee will recommend an award winner to the Executive Board of SIOP.
- The Executive Board may either endorse or reject the recommendations of the Awards Committee but may not substitute a nominee of its own.
- In the absence of a nomination that is deemed deserving of the award by both the Awards Committee and the Executive Board, the award may be withheld.
Criteria for Eligibility
Nominations will be evaluated in terms of the following criteria:
Nominations will be evaluated in terms of the following criteria:
- Methodological, conceptual, and theoretical quality.
- Advances cumulative knowledge and has implications for the development of understanding and explanation.
- Has some implications for the practice of I-O psychology. These implications can be direct or indirect, immediate or anticipated for the future
- Technical excellence. The meta-analysis should employ the best currently available psychometric meta-analysis methods (e.g., Schmidt & Hunter, 2015) and correct for relevant research artifacts that distort initially observed findings, including sampling error variance and measurement error (except that reliability generalization meta-analyses should not correct for measurement error), range restriction, dichotomization, construct validity incompleteness, etc., if these biasing artifacts are present and corrections are possible. The potential for publication bias should also be addressed. The meta-analysis should include a full explanation of why and how the corrections for the biases caused by research artifacts and biases were made, including the theoretical and construct-based justification for the corrections. Any moderator analyses should be consistent with the methods presented in Schmidt and Hunter (2015, Chapter 9), and in particular should show recognition of the advantages and disadvantages of meta-regression. All relevant meta-analysis results and statistics should be reported (cf. pages 489 – 493 of Schmidt and Hunter, 2015). Note that this precludes the use of statistical significance tests to make inferences.
Ideally, the published meta-analysis should contain full explanations of how the criteria above are met. In addition, the nominating letter might address the technical excellence of the nominated article. If some of this information is missing, the awards committee may make inferences. For example, if the implications for practice are not spelled out, the awards committee may identify such implications and may make a judgment on this aspect.
Call for Nominations
Nomination Guidelines
- Nominations may be submitted by any SIOP member. Self-nominations are welcome.
- Only publications with a print publication date in the previous three calendar years are eligible for the award (2021-2023). A meta-analysis nominated in a given year but not chosen can be re-nominated if it still meets the within-three-calendar-years requirement.
- Publications having multiple authors are acceptable. At least one author must be a SIOP member.
- If there are multiple authors, the names of each author must be entered during the online nomination process. Please ensure that all participants in your nomination have current information in their siop.org profiles. All nonmembers should create an account at siop.org (creating accounts is not equivalent to applying for membership).
- A nomination letter should address how the publication meets the evaluation criteria noted below.
- The nomination letter, the nominated publication must be submitted online by the nominator.
- When submitting the nomination materials, nominators will also be asked if the nominee(s) are being investigated, or have been found responsible, for misconduct prohibited in SIOP”s Anti-Harassment Policy and to provide a brief explanation if this is the case.
Current Award Recipients
Award Type
Achievement & Best Paper Awards