IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Testing Kirkpatrick's Four-Level Hierarchy of Training Evaluation: Evidence from Thailand's Automotive Industry

  • Homklin Tassanee

    (Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University)

  • Takahashi Yoshi

    (Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University)

  • Techakanont Kriengkrai

    (Faculty of Economics, Thammasat University)

Several studies of training evaluation have failed to confirm the hierarchy relationship of reaction, learning, and behavior to results because of the difficulty of evaluating training. Furthermore, research in this area has tended to downplay the importance of level one (reaction) evaluation. In this study, we proposed investigating Kirkpatrick’s four-level hierarchy of training evaluation, focusing specifically on two types of reactions, affective and utility, to predict training outcomes. The results of this study expand our understanding of the progressive causal relationship of reaction, learning, and job behavior to results. In particular, this study highlighted the utility reactions in predicting training effectiveness. Implications and future research directions suggested by the results are also discussed.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
File Function: First version, 2013
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Hiroshima University, Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation (IDEC) in its series IDEC DP2 Series with number 3-4.

in new window

Length: 20 pages
Date of creation: May 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:hir:idecdp:3-4
Contact details of provider: Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. A. Giangreco & A. Sebastiano & R. Peccei, 2009. "Trainees' reactions to training: an analysis of the factors affecting overall satisfaction with training," Post-Print hal-00323772, HAL.
  2. Bates, Reid, 2004. "A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 341-347, August.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hir:idecdp:3-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Keisuke Kawata)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.