REJOINDER TO AUSTIN, HUMPHREYS, AND HULIN: CRITICAL REANALYSIS OF BARRETT, CALDWELL, AND ALEXANDER
反驳了奥斯汀等人对动态标准概念的支持，指出缺乏充分证据，并回顾教育、组织和实验心理学证据，发现效度系数稳定或随时间增加，而非普遍的单形模式。
Austin, Humphreys, and Hulin (1989), in their critique of Barrett, Caldwell, and Alexander (1985), disagree with most of the critical comments made about the concept of dynamic criteria. We contend that the burden of proof still rests upon the advocate of a concept. Adequate evidence has not been presented to support the dynamic criteria concept, and Austin et al. (1989) add no new evidence. Austin et al. (1989) claim dynamic criteria can be described as a simplex with correlations decreasing over time. The empirical support for the simplex is based on a few studies with no statistical tests. Evidence from educational, organizational, and experimental psychology is reviewed, and much of it refutes the concept of a pervasive simplex pattern. There is considerable evidence that validity coefficients are stable or may even increase over time. More evidence is required before the Ghiselli and Haire (1960) and Austin et al. (1989) concept of dynamic criteria can be accepted.