Summary
Experimental research is the strongest design for establishing cause and effect, yet it appears rarely in human resource development (HRD) journals. This study asks how many experimental studies have been conducted in HRD, how often they were cited, and how many nonintervention studies used them to make causal statements and recommendations for practice.
We reviewed and coded the research method of articles in four HRD journals: Advances in Developing Human Resources, European Journal of Training and Development, Human Resource Development International, and Human Resource Development Quarterly. We then traced the later studies that cited the experimental articles and coded whether each citation was used to support a causal statement.
Experimental studies made up a small share of what the four journals published, with Human Resource Development Quarterly publishing the most. Later citations of these studies were often used to make causal statements, most frequently by non-experimental quantitative studies and typically in literature review and discussion sections. Being cited often did not mean an experimental study was often used for causal claims.
Why it matters
The paper documents how thin the experimental base is for causal claims in HRD and makes a case for more intervention research in the field.
Citation
Park, S., & Chae, C. (2017). Intervention research and its influence on nonintervention research in human resource development. European Journal of Training and Development, 41(5), 410–433. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-08-2016-0062
Indexed in: SCOPUS
Citation
@online{2017,
author = {},
title = {Intervention {Research} and {Its} {Influence} on
{Nonintervention} {Research} in {Human} {Resource} {Development}},
date = {2017-06-05},
url = {https://chadchae.github.io/posts_publication/2017-06-05-intervention-research-nonintervention-research-hrd/intervention-research-nonintervention-research-hrd.html},
langid = {en}
}