Training Delivery & Instructional Approaches (Part 1)

• [GROUP 4] Arthur, W., Day, E.A., Bennett, W., McNelly, T.L., & Jordan, J.A. (1997). Dyadic versus individual training protocols: Loss and reacquisition of a complex skill. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 783-791.
• [GROUP 1] Arthur, W., Bennett, W., Edens, P.S., & Bell, S.T. (2003). Effectiveness of training in organizations: A meta-analysis of design and evaluation features. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 234-245.
• [GROUP 2] Day, E.A., Blair, C. Daniels, S. Kligyte, V., & Mumford, M.D. (2006). Linking instructional objectives to the design of instructional environments: The integrative training design matrix. Human Resource Management Review, 16, 376-395.
• [GROUP 3] Neal, A., Godley, S.T., Kirkpatrick, T., Dewsnap, G., Joung, W., & Hesketh, B. (2006). An examination of learning processes during critical incident training: Implications for the development of adaptable trainees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1276-1291.

Optional supplemental reading (not required)

• Cooke, N.J., & Fiore, S.M. (2010). Cognitive science-based principles for the design and delivery of training. In S. Kozlowski & E. Salas (Eds.) Learning, Training, and Development in Organizations (pp. 135-165). New York: Routledge.
• Goldstein & Ford pp. 220-249. (This is a portion of Chapter 7.)