IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v3y2010i03p329-334_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity in a Jiffy: How Synthetic Validation Contributes to Personnel Selection

Author

Listed:
  • Oswald, Frederick L.
  • Hough, Leaetta M.

Abstract

Conclusions about the effectiveness of selection systems require gathering, evaluating, weighting, and interpreting validity data, but these conclusions are obviously challenged to the extent that this process is suspect. Local validity information within the organization may be desirable but not available, and conducting a local validity study may be practically infeasible because of limited time, resources, and small sample sizes. Specific validity studies outside the organization may also be problematic if they are based on jobs or settings of questionable relevance, small sample sizes, range-restricted incumbent samples, and unreliable or content-deficient predictor and criterion measures. It is usually an understatement to say that sifting through a pile of such studies to make educated guesses about the validity of selection measures within of a specific organizational setting could be an idiosyncratic, time-consuming, and frustrating process, resulting in little confidence in any summary conclusions.

Suggested Citation

  • Oswald, Frederick L. & Hough, Leaetta M., 2010. "Validity in a Jiffy: How Synthetic Validation Contributes to Personnel Selection," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 329-334, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:3:y:2010:i:03:p:329-334_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1754942600002480/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:3:y:2010:i:03:p:329-334_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.