Technology and employee selection

Handbook of Employee Selection

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 171-193

  Reynolds, Douglas H ^a   Dickter, David N ^b  

^a Development Dimensions International   (United States)

^b PSI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84960198122     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203809808     Document Type: Chapter

References (42)

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2. Bartram, D., & Brown, A. (2004). Online testing: Mode of administration and the stability of OPQ 32i scores. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12, 278-284.
3. Borman, W. C., Lentz, E. M., Schneider, R. J., Houston, J. S., Bearden, R., & Chen, H. T. (2008). Adaptive personality scales as job performance predictors: Initial validation results. In M.S. Fetzer & S.E. Lambert (Eds.), Computer adaptive testing (CAT) and personnel selection. Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Francisco, CA.
4. Cappelli, P. (2001). Making the most of online recruiting. Harvard Business Review, 79, 139-146.
5. Dwight, S. A., & Feigelson, M. E. (2000). A quantitative review of the effect of computerized testing on the measurement of social desirability. Education and Psychological Measurement, 60, 340-360.
6. Embretson, S. E. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
7. England, G. W. (1971). Development and use of weighted application blanks. Dubuque, IA: Brown.
8. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Department of Justice, and Office of Personnel Management. (2004). Agency information collection activities: Adoption of additional questions and answers to clarify and provide a common interpretation of the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures as they relate to the Internet and related technologies. Federal Register, 69(43), 10152-10158.
9. Federal Trade Commission v. Toysmart.com, LLC, 2000 WL 34016434 (D. Mass. July 21, 2000).
10. Fletcher, P. A. K. (2005). From personnel administration to business-driven human capital management. In H. Gueutal, D. L. Stone, & E. Salas (Eds.), The brave new world of eHR: Human resources in the digital age (pp. 54-103). New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.
11. George, C. E., Lankford, J. S., & Wilson, S. E. (1998). The effects of computerized versus paper-and-pencil administration of measures of negative affect. Computers in Human Behavior, 8, 203-209.
12. Gibby, R. E., Biga, A. M., Pratt, A. K., & Irwin, J. L. (2008). Online and unsupervised adaptive cognitive ability testing: Lessons learned. In R. E. Gibby & R. A. Mc Cloy (Chairs), Benefits and challenges of online and unsupervised adaptive testing. Symposium presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Francisco, CA.
13. Gilliland, S., & Cherry, B. (2000). Customers of selection processes. In J.F. Kehoe (Ed.), Managing selection strategies in changing organizations (pp. 158-196). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
14. Gueutal, H. G., & Stone, D. L. (Eds.) (2005). The brave new world of eHR: Human resources in the digital age. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
15. Hausknecht, J. P., Day, D. V., & Thomas, S. C. (2004). Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 57, 639-683.
16. Howard, A., Landy, F. J., & Reynolds, D. H. (2002). Marrying assessment and technology: For better and worse. Workshop conducted at the meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Toronto, Canada.
17. Kehoe, J. F., Dickter, D. N., Russell, D. P., & Sacco, J. M. (2005). e-Selection. In H. Gueutal, D. L. Stone, & E. Salas (Eds.), The brave new world of eHR: Human resources in the digital age (pp.54-103). New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.
18. Landauer, T. (2006). Reliability and validity of a new automated short answer scoring technology. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Test Publishers, Orlando, FL.
19. Mc Cloy, R. A., Heggestad, E. D., & Reeve, C. L. (2005). A silk purse from the sow’s ear: Retrieving normative information from multidimensional forced-choice items. Organizational Research Methods, 8, 222-248.
20. Mead, A. D., & Drasgow, F. (1993). Effects of administration medium: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 449-458.
21. Mead, A.W., Michels, L. C., & Lautenschlager, G. J. (2007). Are Internet and paper-and-pencil personality tests truly comparable? Organizational Research Methods, 10, 322-345.
22. Naglieri, J. A., Drasgow, F., Schmitt, M., Handler, L., Prifitera, A., Margolis, A., & Velasquez, R. (2004). Psychological testing on the Internet: New problems, old issues. American Psychologist, 59, 150-162.
23. National Telecommunications and Information Administration. (2002). A nation online: How Americans are expanding their use of the Internet. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
24. Outtz, J. (1998). Video-based situational testing: Pros and cons. Workshop presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Dallas, TX.
25. Pew Research Center. (2007). Demographics of Internet users. Retrieved June 15, 2008, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Data-Tools/Download-Data/Trend-Data.aspx
26. Ployhart, R. E., Weekly, J. A., Holtz, B. C., & Kemp, C. (2003). Web-based and paper-and-pencil testing of applicants in a proctored setting: Are personality, biodata, and situational judgment tests comparable? Personnel Psychology, 56, 733-752.
27. Potosky, D., & Bobko, P. (2004). Selection testing via the Internet: Practical considerations and exploratory empirical findings. Personnel Psychology, 57, 1003-1034.
28. Reynolds, D. H. & Lin, L. (2003). An unfair platform? Subgroup reactions to Internet selection techniques. In T. N. Bauer (Chair), Applicant reactions to high-tech recruitment and selection methods. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL.
29. Richman, W. L., Kiesler, S., Weisband, S., & Drasgow, F. (1999). A meta-analytic study of social desirability distortion in computer-administered questionnaires, traditional questionnaires, and interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 754-775.
30. Roberts, J. S., Donoghue, J. R., & Laughlin, J. E. (2000). A general item response theory model for unfolding unidimensional polytomous responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 3-32.
31. Rupp, D. E., & Fritzsche, B. A. (2008). Using technology to enhance assessment and development programs. Workshop conducted at the meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Francisco, CA.
32. Ryan, A. M., & Ployhart, R. E. (2000). Applicants’ perceptions of selection procedures and decisions: A critical review and agenda for the future. Journal of Management, 26, 565-606.
33. Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S. (2003). Internet-based personality testing: Equivalence of measures and assessees’ perceptions and reactions. International Journal of Assessment and Selection, 11, 194-203.
34. Siem, F. M. (1991). Predictive validity of response latencies from computer administered personality tests. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Conference of the Military Testing Association, San Antonio, TX.
35. Sinar, E. F., Reynolds, D. H., & Paquet, S. L. (2003). Nothing but ‘Net? Corporate image and web-based testing. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 150-157.
36. Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. (2003). Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection procedures (4th ed.). Bowling Green, OH: Author.
37. Standish Group. (1995). The chaos report. West Yarmouth, MA: Author.
38. Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Drasgow, F., & Williams, B. A. (2006). Examining assumptions about item responding in personality assessment: Should ideal point methods be considered for scale development and scoring? Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 25-39.
39. Tippins, N. T., Beaty, J., Drasgow, F., Gibson, W. M., Pearlman, K., Segall, D. O., & Shepherd, W. (2006). Unproctored Internet testing in employment settings. Personnel Psychology, 59, 189-225.
40. U.S. Department of Labor. (2005). Obligation to solicit race and gender data for agency enforcement purposes: Final rule. Federal Register, 70 (194), 58947-58961.
41. Weekley, J. A., & Jones, C. (1997). Video-based situational testing. Personnel Psychology, 50, 25-49.
42. Weiss, J. R. (2001). Six things you should know about XML. The Industrial Organizational Psychologist, 39, 30-34.