A content analysis of US federal court cases was conducted to assess the relative frequency of litigation associated with nine selection devices: 1) unstructured interviews; 2) structured interviews; 3) biographical information blanks; 4) cognitive ability tests; 5) personality tests; 6) honesty tests; 7) physical ability tests; 8) work sample tests; and 9) assessment centers. The outcomes of the cases (whether the devices were ruled to be discriminatory) for each of the nine types of selection devices were also examined. The possible implications of the current findings for organizations and researchers are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract

This paper reviews the extent of use, reliability, validity, and potential problems of five selection screening devices -reference checks, background investigations, medical exams, drug tests, and polygraph tests. Additionally, federal court cases involving the five devices from 1978 to the present were identified and content analyzed. Data is reported on: 1) the relative frequency of legal challenges associated with the five screening devices, 2) the outcomes of the legal challenges, 3) the types of charges (e. g., race, sex, age, national origin, or handicap) involved in the cases, and 4) the job types and organization types associated with the legal challenges. The results of the study suggest that the use of background investigations and reference checks may be legally risky. Also, protective service positions and city government organizations seem to be relatively more prone to litigation.he increasingly competitive business environment has led some organizations to focus on their human resource (HR) system as a means of enhancing their m productivity. Organizational selection practices, in particular, show much promise. Empirical research data has provided evidence of a strong link between orga nizations' use of certain selection devices and overall profitability. 1 Selection devices such as cognitive ability tests, biographical information blanks, structured interviews, work samples, and personality tests have been found to be valid predictors of future levels of worker performance. 2 The selection devices referred to above are "positive" in nature. Their role is to identify those individuals who, if hired, would be the highest performers. Other meth ods might be referred to as "negative" selection devices. Selection methods such as reference checks, background investigations, medical exams, drug tests, and poly graphs are used to screen or weed out certain job applicants. The role of negative selection devices is not to identify high performers, but to verify information and uncover potential problems with job candidates.A good deal of empirical research has been conducted on the positive selection devices mentioned previously. Several studies have investigated the reliability, validi ty, utility, and legal risks associated with the "positive predictors." Conversely, very lit tle hard, empirical data has been gathered on negative selection devices. The majority of the published articles are non-empirical in nature, and, instead, frequently discuss the legality and ethical issues associated with the use of negative selection devices.The purpose of the present study is to provide some empirical data regarding the actual degree of litigation associated with the use of five negative selection devices (reference checks, background investigations, medical exams, drug tests, and poly graphs). First, this article will briefly review the extent of organizational use, reliabili ty, validity, and potential problems of each of the five screening devices. Second, this article will report the results of a study of the ...

No abstract