The Impact of Job Analysis on Employment Test Validation for Minority and Nonminority Accounting Personnel

Abstract

The purposes of the present study were (a) to examine the comparative validity of a written job knowledge test constructed on the basis of a systematic job analysis with that of a commercial employment test selected in the absence of a prior job analysis for accounting positions and (b) to determine the fairness of each test for minority and nonminority job applicants. Results indicated that the job knowledge test was a valid and unbiased predictor of relevant criteria of job performance while the commercial employment test produced adverse impact and lacked validity. Implications of the results for future research studies and test validation efforts involving differential prediction are discussed.A highly controversial topic surrounding the use of personnel tests concerris possible black-white differences in test validity. As Boehm (1977) has noted, "because the issue is so closely tied to socially important issues of equal opportunity and fair employment, interest in possible differences in test validity has extended far beyond the profession of psychology" (p. 146).Recent reviews of investigations of test validity in samples of black and white workers focusing on both single-group and differential validity have reached different conclusions. Some investigators (Boehm, 1972; Boehm, 1977;Hunter and Schmidt, 1978;Schmidt, Berner and Hunter, 1973) have generally concluded that differences in black-white validities do not occur any more frequently than would be expected on the basis of chance alone.Requests for reprints should be sent to:

A Review of Structure in the Selection Interview

“…Job analysis is expected to enhance all user reactions ("0ble 1). It has been shown to reduce EEO bias (Kesselman & Lopez, 1979) and help defend organizations in court (Kleiman & Faley, 1985) for other selection procedures. It is likely to do the same for interviews ( b e y & Faley, 1988; J. Campion & Arvey, 1989), and there is evidence to support this assertion from court cases on interviewing (Gollub-Williamson et al, 1996).…”

Modeling the Effects of Banding in Personnel Selection

“…Our review of papers published since 1977 led to very similar conclusions. Based on data presented by Cascio et al (1991), Feild, Bayley, andBayley (1977), Hennessy and Merrifield (1978), Kesselman and Lopez (1979), Mercer (1984), Morstain (1984), Sandoval (1982), , we estimated the mean and standard deviation of the reported SD ratios to be .96 and .24, respectively (estimates of the distribution of group mean differences were obtained from this same set of studies). In our simulations, we used SD ratio values of .70, .95, and 1.20 to approximate the 15th, 50th, and 85th percentiles of the distribution of the ratio of lower-scoring to higherscoring group standard deviations.…”

A Review of Canadian Human Rights Cases Involving the Employment Interview

“…1988) and were identified by as important components of interview structure. These four components are believed to reduce the likelihood that interviewer bias would hinder the interview process and/or outcome (Dipboye, 1992(Dipboye, , 1994 Kesselman & Lopez, 1979;Pulakos & Schmitt, 1995).…”

“…Job analysis may prevent interviewers from basing questions on idiosyncratic beliefs about job requirements (Dipboye, 1994). and has been shown to reduce the likelihood of bias (Kesselman & Lopez, 1979). Current industrial psychology and human resource management textbooks discuss job analysis methods before providing descriptions of various selection tools, such as the interview, since job analysis represents the first step in ensuring the psychometric soundness of any selection process (e.g., Catano et al, 2001;Gatewood & Feild, 1998;Gomez-Mejia, Balkin, Cardy, Dimick, & Templer, 2004).…”