The value of relative-time-spent ratings in task-oriented job analysis

Recent studies have called for the abandonment of the relative-time-spent scale in task inventories. This recommendation is based on findings that the job profile created with the scale data is highly correlated with the profile created from a much simpler “Do you perform this task?” checklist. We examined this issue using 3 inventories and 42 jobs (N=2252). Profile correlations were computed on only the tasks actually performed by incumbents to avoid possibly inflated rs due to including irrelevant tasks. The specificity of task inventory items was proposed as an explanation for the high correlation between the two job profiles. Specificity of items was examined by looking at both the type (job duties versus tasks) and the amount (number of items in job profile and average number of items relevant to each job) of items used in the inventory. Correlations between time spent and checklist profiles were in the .80's and .90's regardless of the number of irrelevant tasks or the specificity of tasks. We agree with previous military research and conclude that the relative-time-spent scale has limited incremental utility beyond a dichotomous checklist.     

Some observations on a Popperian experiment concerning observation

In several places Popper describes a little experiment in which an audience is given the non-specific command Observe! He draws a number of conclusions from this experiment, in particular that observation takes place in the presence of theoretical problems, questions, hypotheses or points of view. The paper argues that while Popper's experiment is instructive, it hardly supports the strong conclusions he draws about the theory-dominance of observation in science. In particular, it is argued that talk of principles of selection which guide us to relevant observations, rather than the host of irrelevant observations of the naive inductivist, is misleading. Rather, it is the goals, aims, motives or interests of an observer that guide observation and these need not always involve a theoretical component.     

Should we study the Hippocratic Oath?

In this commentary on a study by H. Steven Moffic, et al., of the current status of the Hippocratic Oath in medical education, Veatch discusses the relation of the oath to ethical conduct, the meaning of primum non nocere ("do no harm"), and the limitations of practicing Hippocratic ethics.