Person–environment fit or person plus environment: A meta-analysis of studies using polynomial regression analysis Liu-Qin Yang a, ⁎, Edward L. Levine a, 1 , Mark A. Smith b , Dan Ispas a , Michael E. Rossi a a PCD4118, Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, 33620, USA b Valtera Corporation, Houston, TX, USA article info abstract The purpose of this study was to examine if the non-linear terms in polynomial regression analysis (PRA) explain substantial amounts of variance in assumed outcomes over and above the linear terms. This meta-analysis reviewed a total of 30 studies from 25 articles on person–environment (P-E) fit in which PRA was used. We found that none of the 30 studies did rigorous cross-validation for PRA. In addition, the overall population R 2 change attributable to the non-linear terms (PE, P 2 and E 2 ) in PRA was only .008. However, the P-E interaction term may be more important in some situations than in others, based on the data gathered here. Specifically, the non-linear terms in PRA added to the variance explained by the linear terms (P and E) when studies examined assumed outcome variables like contextual performance or job attitudes as opposed to task performance. In summary, PRA could potentially be effective in investigating P-E fit and other human resource management-related phenomena when it is used in appropriate scenarios. © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Person-environment fit Polynomial regression analysis R2 change Non-linear terms Cross-validation 1. Introduction The degree of fit between people and environments within which they function is a concept that dates back many years in both psychology (e.g., Lewin, 1935; Murray, 1938) and human resource management (HRM). For instance, in HRM, person–vocation fit is one general way that researchers have considered person–environment (P-E) fit for work situations. Holland's theory of job fit is probably the best known of these theories (Holland, 1985). It states that people are happier and more successful in their work environment when their personality matches characteristics of the environment. As an example, this theory maintains that an artistic person would be most successful in artistic jobs, whereas an investigative person would be most successful in investiga- tive jobs. The key notion is that it is not just the person or the environment that determines success on the job — it is the match or fit between them. As a very general alternative to Holland's theory, one could postulate that certain types of people are generally more successful (regardless of job) and certain vocations have more successful workers (regardless of the types of people). In this case, the person–vocation fit may not be as important as a focus on the people and their vocations. Researchers have proposed theories and conducted empirical studies dealing with other types of fit including Person–Job (P-J), Person–Group (P-G), Person–Organization (P-O) and Person–Person (P-P) such as person–supervisor fit (e.g., Kristof, 1996; Kristof- Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005; Smith & Levine, 2004). Despite the well-known theories of person–environment (P-E) fit, studies testing them have often utilized what are now recognized as inappropriate measures and indicators of fit(Edwards, 1991). Thus, it has been problematic to interpret many of the findings. More recently, researchers have begun to follow the recommendations of Edwards and colleagues (e.g., Edwards & Parry, 1993) who have called for the use of a more complex and appropriate regression model, called polynomial regression analysis (PRA). In the unconstrained PRA model, the relation can be Human Resource Management Review 18 (2008) 311–321 ⁎ Corresponding author. PCD4118G, Psychology Department, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL., 33617. E-mail addresses: lyang2@mail.usf.edu (L.-Q. Yang), elevine@shell.cas.usf.edu (E.L. Levine), msmith@valtera.com (M.A. Smith). 1 Tel.: +1813 974 0459; fax: +1 813 974 4617. 1053-4822/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.07.014 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Human Resource Management Review journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/humres