Syntes: Taylor, Russ-Eft & Chan (2005) — behaviour modelling training: strongest on learning, weaker on job behaviour

Källa: Taylor, P. J., Russ-Eft, D. F. & Chan, D. W. L. (2005). A Meta-Analytic Review of Behavior Modeling Training. Journal of Applied Psychology 90(4), 692–709. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.692

Verified content

• [abstract] 117 studies; six training outcomes.
• [abstract] Effects largest for learning outcomes, smaller for job behaviour, smaller still for results.
• [abstract] Declarative-knowledge effects decayed over time; skill and job-behaviour effects stayed stable or increased.
• [abstract] Transfer to the job was greatest with mixed (positive and negative) models, trainee-generated practice scenarios, goal setting, trained superiors, and rewards and sanctions at work.

Limits

• [assessment] Abstract only; no effect sizes in the abstract, so it cannot yet say whether job-behaviour effects reach C33's "about half a standard deviation". One training method, not workplace training in general.

Why it is in the library

C33 bundles learning and on-the-job behaviour at about half a standard deviation or more. This classic meta-analysis of one of the most common workplace methods finds a clear gradient (learning > behaviour > results) and decay of knowledge, which is the split C33 would need to survive.

Added 2026-11-15 by the project (weekly source sweep, kind: old (major review); read: abstract). [abstract] = from the published abstract; [full text] = read in the full text; [assessment] = the project's own assessment.