The risk of adverse impact in selections based on a test with known effect size

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Volumn 65, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 737-758

  De Corte, Wilfried ^a   Lievens, Filip ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Adverse impact; Effect size; Selection; Test

Indexed keywords

EID: 27144533203     PISSN: 00131644     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013164404272503     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Agresti, A. (2002). Categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley.
2. Bobko, P., Roth, P. L., & Potosky, D. (1999). Derivation and implications of a meta-analytic matrix incorporating cognitive ability, alternative predictors, and job performance. Personnel Psychology, 52, 561-589.
3. Crawford, J. R., Gray, C. D., & Allan, K. M. (1995). The WAIS-R (UK) basic psychometric properties in an adult UK sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 34, 237-250.
4. David, H. A. (1981). Order statistics (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley.
5. Gatewood, R. D., & Feild, H. S. (2001). Human resource selection. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt College.
6. Harkness, W. L. (1965). Properties of the extended hypergeometric distribution. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 36, 938-945.
7. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. London: Academic Press.
8. Hough, L. M., Oswald, F. L., & Ployhart, R. E. (2001). Determinants, detection and amelioration of adverse impact in personnel selection procedures: Issues, evidence and lessons learned. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 152-194.
9. Hunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10. Johnson, N. L., Kotz, S., & Kemp, A. W. (1993). Univariate discrete distributions. New York: John Wiley.
11. Morris, S. B. (2001). Sample size requirements for adverse impact analysis. Applied HRM Research, 6, 13-32.
12. Morris, S. B., & Lobsenz, R. E. (2000). Significance tests and confidence intervals for the adverse impact ratio. Personnel Psychology, 53, 89-111.
13. Ones, D. S., & Anderson, N. (2002). Gender and ethnic group differences on personality scales in selection: Some British data. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 255-276.
14. Plomin, R. (1999). Genetics and general cognitive ability. Nature, 402, C25-C29.
15. Roth, P. I., Bevier, C. A., Bobko, P., Switzer, F. S., III, & Tyler, P. (2001). Ethnic group differences in cognitive ability in employment and educational settings: a meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 54, 297-330.
16. Sackett, P. R., & Ellingson, J. E. (1997). The effects of forming multi-predictor composites on group differences and adverse impact. Personnel Psychology, 50, 707-721.
17. Sackett, P. R., Schmitt, N., Ellingson, J. E., & Kabin, M. B. (2001). High-stakes testing in employment, credentialing and higher education. American Psychologist, 56, 302-318.
18. Schmidt, F. L., Hunter, J. E., McKenzie, R. C., & Muldrow, T. W. (1979). Impact of valid selection procedures on workforce productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 609-626.
19. Schmitt, N., Clause, C. S., & Pulakos, E. D. (1996). Subgroup differences associated with different measures of some common job-relevant constructs. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 115-139). New York: John Wiley.
20. Schmitt, N., Rogers, W., Chan, D., Sheppard, L., & Jennings, D. (1997). Adverse impact and predictive efficiency of various predictor combinations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 719-730.
21. Stuart, A., & Ord, K. J. (1994). Kendall's advanced theory of statistics: Volume 1, Distribution theory (6th ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
22. Tiffin, J., & Vincent, N. L. (1960). Comparison of empirical and theoretical expectancies. Personnel Psychology, 13, 59-64.
23. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1978). Uniform guidelines on employment selection procedures. Federal Register, 43, 38290-38315.