Publication Type
Journal Article
Version
acceptedVersion
Publication Date
11-2022
Abstract
This paper systematically revisits prior meta-analytic conclusions about the criterion-related validity of personnel selection procedures, and particularly the effect of range restriction corrections on those validity estimates. Corrections for range restriction in meta-analyses of predictor–criterion relationships in personnel selection contexts typically involve the use of an artifact distribution. After outlining and critiquing five approaches that have commonly been used to create and apply range restriction artifact distributions, we conclude that each has significant issues that often result in substantial overcorrection and that therefore the validity of many selection procedures for predicting job performance has been substantially overestimated. Revisiting prior meta-analytic conclusions produces revised validity estimates. Key findings are that most of the same selection procedures that ranked high in prior summaries remain high in rank, but with mean validity estimates reduced by .10–.20 points. Structured interviews emerged as the top-ranked selection procedure. We also pair validity estimates with information about mean Black–White subgroup differences per selection procedure, providing information about validity–diversity tradeoffs. We conclude that our selection procedures remain useful, but selection predictor–criterion relationships are considerably lower than previously thought.
Keywords
selection procedures, validity, meta-analysis, range restriction, artifact distribution
Discipline
Industrial and Organizational Psychology | Organizational Behavior and Theory
Research Areas
Organisational Behaviour and Human Resources
Publication
Journal of Applied Psychology
Volume
107
Issue
11
First Page
2040
Last Page
2068
ISSN
0021-9010
Identifier
10.1037/apl0000994
Publisher
American Psychological Association
Citation
SACKETT, Paul R.; ZHANG, Charlene; BERRY, Christopher M.; and LIEVENS, Filip.
Revisiting meta-analytic estimates of validity in personnel selection: Addressing systematic overcorrection for restriction of range. (2022). Journal of Applied Psychology. 107, (11), 2040-2068.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/6894
Copyright Owner and License
Authors
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Additional URL
https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000994
Included in
Industrial and Organizational Psychology Commons, Organizational Behavior and Theory Commons