Prediction of Job Performance: Review of Military Studies

Vineberg, Robert; Joyner, John

doi:10.21236/ada113208

Cited by 18 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Job tryouts were also valid predictors, as were biographical inventories. These results reinforce those from previous reviews by Ghiselli (1973), Dunnette (1972), Reilly and Chao (1982), and Vineberg and Joyner (1982). The Hunters also examined ten other types of predictors for entry-level jobs.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Predicting job performance: A comparison of expert opinion and research findings

Dakin

Armstrong

1989

International Journal of Forecasting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A survey was conducted of New Zealand personnel consultants. Their beliefs about the validity of various selection tools and their claimed usage of these tools was then compared with the validities in a previously published meta-analysis. The experts claimed to use the predictors they believed to be most valid. However, their beliefs about validity were unrelated to empirically demonstrated validities (Spearman's rho = -0.06). Suggestions were made on the types of research that are needed to improve predictive ability in selection and on the ways in which practitioners can use existing research. AbstractA survey was conducted of New Zealand personnel consultants. Their beliefs about the validity of various selection tools and their claimed usage of these tools was then compared with the validities in a previously published meta-analysis. The experts claimed to use the predictors they believed to be most valid. However, their beliefs about validity were unrelated to empirically demonstrated validities (Spearman's rho = -0.06). Suggestions were made on the types of research that are needed to improve predictive ability in selection and on the ways in which practitioners can use existing research.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Predicting job performance: A comparison of expert opinion and research findings

Dakin

Armstrong

1989

International Journal of Forecasting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There have been many comprehensive reviews of validation studies. Early reviews were both reviewed and quantified by Hunter and Hunter (1984), including Ghiselli (1966Ghiselli ( , 1973, Dunnette (1972), Reilly and Chao (1982), and Vineberg and Joyner (1982). Hunter and Hunter also added a number of new meta-analyses.…”

Section: Basic Validity Findings Comprehensive Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intelligence and job performance: Economic and social implications.

Hunter

Schmidt

1996

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

166

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General mental ability (intelligence) is the dominant determinant of the large individual differences in work output on the job revealed by research, but highly visible individual differences in citizenship behavior on the job make the intelligenceperformance relationship harder to observe in everyday life. Over time, the validity of job experience for predicting performance declines, while that of ability remains constant or increases. Path analyses indicate that the major reason ability predicts performance so well is that higher ability individuals learn relevant job knowledge more quickly and learn more of it. The current social policy that strongly discourages use of mental ability in hiring is counterproductive and has produced severe performance decrements. This policy should be changed to encourage the use of ability measures. However, it should also encourage the use of personality measures that increase overall predictive validity while simultaneously reducing differences in minority-majority hiring rates.

show abstract

“…the considerable variation in the number of studies on the criterion of productivity) due to different search strategies (see Durlak & Lipsey, 1991) or the integration of different types of report such as journal articles or unpublished research reports (see Smith, 1980); (2) differences in correction procedures (e.g. corrections for measurement error or range restriction in predictors and/or criteria); (3) partial inclusions of noncross-validated validities; (4) differences in the selection of studies based on variations in the methodological standards required of primary studies; ( 5 ) unreliabilities in the coding of study characteristics; and (6) a lack of agreement on the calculation of effect sizes (Wanous, Sullivan & Malinak, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodological moderators in validating biographical data in personnel selection¹

Bliesener

1996

J Occupat & Organ Psyc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous studies have demonstrated the validity of biographical data in psychological diagnosis, and several meta-analyses have confirmed their effectiveness in specific applications. In contrast, the present meta-analysis (based on 116 studies with 165 independent validities) addresses the recent discussion on methodological artifacts in the development and validation of biographical instruments. Threats to validity are identified in (I) general issues of research design and (h) specific techniques used to construct and validate biographical data. The effects on estimated mean validity of both methodological artifacts and situational moderator variables were compared, and it WdS demonstrated that they cannot be treated independently. The meta-analysis also showed that a validity of ,220 still remained after making corrections for all analysed artifacts, and that not all methodological criticisms were justified. * Partly cross-validated, partly corrected for shrinkage. Key. RR = range restriction, Re1 = measurement error, E = external key. Received I7 December 1992;final version received 10 February I995 Applied Psychology, 40, 383-385. development of biodata keys: The influence of social desirability.

show abstract

Prediction of Job Performance: Review of Military Studies

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

Predicting job performance: A comparison of expert opinion and research findings

Predicting job performance: A comparison of expert opinion and research findings

Intelligence and job performance: Economic and social implications.

Methodological moderators in validating biographical data in personnel selection¹

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Prediction of Job Performance: Review of Military Studies

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

Predicting job performance: A comparison of expert opinion and research findings

Predicting job performance: A comparison of expert opinion and research findings

Intelligence and job performance: Economic and social implications.

Methodological moderators in validating biographical data in personnel selection1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Methodological moderators in validating biographical data in personnel selection¹