PSYC 642 Week 8 Article Review Example

Article Review: Four Recent Syntheses on Diversity, Leadership and Team Training and the Science of Workplace Instruction

Topic and Selection

This review examines what current research says about three kinds of training that organizations invest in heavily, diversity, leadership and team training, along with the broader science of how people learn at work. Meta-analyses and integrative reviews were chosen because they combine many studies and give practitioners the clearest guidance.

Annotated Bibliography

Bezrukova, K., Spell, C. S., Perry, J. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2016). A meta-analytical integration of over 40 years of research on diversity training evaluation. Psychological Bulletin, 142(11), 1227-1274. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000067

Bezrukova et al. (2016) combined more than four decades of evaluations of diversity training to ask what the training changes and for how long. Across the studies, diversity training had a moderate overall effect, strongest on trainees' reactions and on cognitive learning about diversity issues. Effects on knowledge tended to persist over time, while changes in attitudes faded after training ended. Programs worked better when they were integrated with other diversity initiatives rather than offered as stand-alone events, when they lasted longer and when they addressed both awareness and skills. The size and time span of the synthesis are strengths, though the underlying studies vary in quality and many rely on self-report. For practice, the article suggests treating diversity training as one part of a sustained organizational effort and measuring behavior over months, not only attitudes immediately after a workshop. It connects directly to Noe's discussion of managing diversity as a business and social responsibility, and it cautions against judging a program by how much participants enjoyed it.

Bisbey, T. M., Reyes, D. L., Traylor, A. M., & Salas, E. (2019). Teams of psychologists helping teams: The evolution of the science of team training. American Psychologist, 74(3), 278-289. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000419

In this review, Bisbey et al. (2019) trace how the science of team training developed, from early military and aviation programs, including crew resource management, through applications in health care and other high-stakes industries. They describe how psychologists identified the competencies that make teams effective, such as communication, coordination, mutual performance monitoring and backup behavior, and how training methods evolved to build them through simulation, guided practice and structured debriefs. The authors conclude that team training reliably improves teamwork processes and performance when it targets specific competencies and includes realistic practice with feedback, and they identify open questions about virtual and multiteam settings. As a narrative review by leading researchers, it synthesizes rather than computes effects. For training designers, it argues that team performance should be trained as a team skill rather than assumed to follow from training individuals separately. The review also stresses that team training should be evaluated by observing teams at work, since members' self-reports of teamwork can overstate change. Hospitals, airlines and manufacturing plants with shift crews are obvious places to apply these lessons.

Kraiger, K., & Ford, J. K. (2021). The science of workplace instruction: Learning and development applied to work. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 8, 45-72. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-060109

Kraiger and Ford (2021) review research on how instruction at work produces learning and how that learning reaches the job. They organize the literature around the learner, the design of instruction and the work context, arguing that effective programs engage learners actively, provide meaningful practice and feedback and are supported by the environment to which learners return. The authors also discuss how technology and the growth of informal and self-directed learning are changing what workplace instruction looks like, and they call for research on learning that happens outside formal programs. As an integrative review in a respected annual series, the article is broad rather than quantitative. Its central message for practitioners is that learning should be designed as a process that begins before training and continues after it, not as a single event in a classroom or online module. This view extends Noe's chapter on the future of training and development, where learning increasingly happens on demand, on mobile devices and through colleagues rather than in scheduled courses.

Lacerenza, C. N., Reyes, D. L., Marlow, S. L., Joseph, D. L., & Salas, E. (2017). Leadership training design, delivery, and implementation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(12), 1686-1718. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000241

Lacerenza et al. (2017) meta-analyzed 335 independent samples to determine whether leadership training works and which design features make it more effective. Training produced gains at every level the authors examined, from trainee reactions and learning to conduct at work and organizational outcomes, and the gain in transfer was especially large. The stronger programs began with a needs analysis, built in feedback, mixed several delivery methods including practice, spread content over multiple sessions and met face to face. The large number of samples and the attention to specific design features make this one of the most useful syntheses available for training designers, although the authors note that the quality of primary studies varied. For practice, the findings support investing in leadership programs that are designed deliberately, rather than one-day lectures, and they align closely with Noe's principles of needs assessment, practice and transfer. The finding that spaced sessions outperformed a single concentrated program is especially relevant for organizations that compress leadership development into one off-site retreat, since spreading the same content over several weeks gives new leaders time to try skills and return with questions.