{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/22854"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/22854","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"How managers and training professionals attribute causality for results: Implications for training evaluation","abstract":"The purpose of this study was to explore differences in how managers and training professionals made causal judgements and to compare the processes they used against the processes described in causal attribution theory. Designed to collect information from within the business context, the interview questions were focused on actual events which the participants had experienced in the performance of their business responsibilities.","abstract_html":"The purpose of this study was to explore differences in how managers and training professionals made causal judgements and to compare the processes they used against the processes described in causal attribution theory. Designed to collect information from within the business context, the interview questions were focused on actual events which the participants had experienced in the performance of their business responsibilities.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Brown, Danny Carol"],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Education","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Johnson, Scott D."],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2011,"date_issued":"2011-05-07T13:53:42Z","date_published":"2011-05-07T13:53:42Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:20Z","subjects":["Education, Adult and Continuing","Education, Vocational"],"languages":["eng"],"rights":["Copyright 1994 Brown, Danny Carol"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["AAI9512308","(UMI)AAI9512308"],"render_values":[{"text":"AAI9512308","href":null,"code":true},{"text":"(UMI)AAI9512308","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/22854","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Johnson, Scott D."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Brown, Danny Carol"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2011-05-07T13:53:42Z","10000-01-01","1994"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Education"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Education, Adult and Continuing","Education, Vocational"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["eng"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright 1994 Brown, Danny Carol"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["AAI9512308","(UMI)AAI9512308","http://hdl.handle.net/2142/22854"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["The purpose of this study was to explore differences in how managers and training professionals made causal judgements and to compare the processes they used against the processes described in causal attribution theory. Designed to collect information from within the business context, the interview questions were focused on actual events which the participants had experienced in the performance of their business responsibilities.","Eighteen purposefully selected, experienced business professionals participated in the semistructured interviews. A coding scheme derived from factors identified in causal attribution theory, an inductive analysis, and a search for signal words which indicated the presence of causal relationships in the text were used to analyze the data.","Several themes emerged: (a) complete information needed to make systematic causal judgements was rarely available; (b) both managers and training professionals relied on causal schemata developed through knowledge and experience; (c) when participants encountered data that were inconsistent with their hypothesis, they considered both correlation and alternative hypotheses as they compared the strength of the original hypothesis against the alternative hypotheses to make a causal judgement.","Training professionals differed from managers in that they referred to use of data from surveys, focus groups, and course evaluation instruments, and to information collected through conversation with other training professionals, as sources of information when making causal judgements; managers did not. Training professionals reported training as a cause of the positive results they observed; managers generally did not. Training professionals were aware of processes, but often had incomplete knowledge of results, while managers had direct knowledge of results in their own departments, but incomplete knowledge of what results had been achieved in other parts of their organization.","Made available in DSpace on 2011-05-07T13:53:42Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license.txt: 4922 bytes, checksum: 910b249b4beec47e7ab768910c8f966f (MD5) 9512308.pdf: 6903645 bytes, checksum: 78efd493d136a184bb127635f5e814f9 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1994","Item marked as restricted to the 'UIUC Users [automated]' Group (id=2) by Howard Ding (hding2@illinois.edu) on 2011-05-07T15:00:28Z Item is restricted indefinitely.","Restriction data tranferred 2014-07-01T11:28:36-05:00 Original Data Group with Access UIUC Users [automated] Release Date: none Reason: ETDs are only available to UIUC Users without author permission","ETDs are only available to UIUC Users without author permission","U of I Only"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["How managers and training professionals attribute causality for results: Implications for training evaluation"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Johnson, Scott D."],"dc:creator":["Brown, Danny Carol"],"dc:date":["2011-05-07T13:53:42Z","10000-01-01","1994"],"dc:description":["The purpose of this study was to explore differences in how managers and training professionals made causal judgements and to compare the processes they used against the processes described in causal attribution theory. Designed to collect information from within the business context, the interview questions were focused on actual events which the participants had experienced in the performance of their business responsibilities.","Eighteen purposefully selected, experienced business professionals participated in the semistructured interviews. A coding scheme derived from factors identified in causal attribution theory, an inductive analysis, and a search for signal words which indicated the presence of causal relationships in the text were used to analyze the data.","Several themes emerged: (a) complete information needed to make systematic causal judgements was rarely available; (b) both managers and training professionals relied on causal schemata developed through knowledge and experience; (c) when participants encountered data that were inconsistent with their hypothesis, they considered both correlation and alternative hypotheses as they compared the strength of the original hypothesis against the alternative hypotheses to make a causal judgement.","Training professionals differed from managers in that they referred to use of data from surveys, focus groups, and course evaluation instruments, and to information collected through conversation with other training professionals, as sources of information when making causal judgements; managers did not. Training professionals reported training as a cause of the positive results they observed; managers generally did not. Training professionals were aware of processes, but often had incomplete knowledge of results, while managers had direct knowledge of results in their own departments, but incomplete knowledge of what results had been achieved in other parts of their organization.","Made available in DSpace on 2011-05-07T13:53:42Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license.txt: 4922 bytes, checksum: 910b249b4beec47e7ab768910c8f966f (MD5) 9512308.pdf: 6903645 bytes, checksum: 78efd493d136a184bb127635f5e814f9 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1994","Item marked as restricted to the 'UIUC Users [automated]' Group (id=2) by Howard Ding (hding2@illinois.edu) on 2011-05-07T15:00:28Z Item is restricted indefinitely.","Restriction data tranferred 2014-07-01T11:28:36-05:00 Original Data Group with Access UIUC Users [automated] Release Date: none Reason: ETDs are only available to UIUC Users without author permission","ETDs are only available to UIUC Users without author permission","U of I Only"],"dc:identifier":["AAI9512308","(UMI)AAI9512308","http://hdl.handle.net/2142/22854"],"dc:language":["eng"],"dc:rights":["Copyright 1994 Brown, Danny Carol"],"dc:subject":["Education, Adult and Continuing","Education, Vocational"],"dc:title":["How managers and training professionals attribute causality for results: Implications for training evaluation"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Education"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:20Z"}