首页> 外文期刊>Personnel psychology >Reviewing, Categorizing, and Analyzing the Literature on Black-White Mean Differences for Predictors of Job Performance: Verifying Some perceptions and Updating/Correcting Others
【24h】

Reviewing, Categorizing, and Analyzing the Literature on Black-White Mean Differences for Predictors of Job Performance: Verifying Some perceptions and Updating/Correcting Others

机译:回顾,分类和分析有关工作表现预测因素的黑白均值差异的文献:验证某些看法并更新/纠正其他看法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In both theoretical and applied literatures, there is confusion regarding accurate values for expected Black-White subgroup differences in personnel selection test scores. Much confusion arises because empirical estimates of standardized subgroup differences (d) are subject to many of the same biasing factors associated with validity coefficients (i.e., d is functionally related to a point-biserial r). To address such issues, we review/cumulate, categorize, and analyze a systematic set of many predictor-specific meta-analyses in the literature. We focus on confounds due to general use of concurrent, versus applicant, samples in the literature on Black-White d. We also focus on potential confusion due to different constructs being assessed within the same selection test method, as well as the influence of those constructs on d. It is shown that many types of predictors (such as biodata inventories or assessment centers) can have magnitudes of d that are much larger than previously thought. Indeed, some predictors (such as work samples) can have ds similar to that associated with paper-and-pencil tests of cognitive ability. We present more realistic values of d for both researcher and practitioner use. Implications for practice and future research are noted.
机译:在理论和应用文献中,关于人员选择测试分数中预期的黑与白亚组差异的准确值存在混淆。由于标准化子组差异(d)的经验估计会受到许多与有效性系数相关的相同偏见因素的影响(即d在功能上与点双数r有关),因此引起了很多混乱。为了解决这些问题,我们对文献中的许多预测因子特异的荟萃分析进行了系统的回顾/汇总,分类和分析。我们将重点放在混淆问题上,因为在Black-White d文献中,由于并发样本与申请人样本相比普遍使用。我们还关注由于在同一选择测试方法中评估了不同构建体而引起的潜在混乱,以及这些构建体对d的影响。结果表明,许多类型的预测变量(例如生物数据清单或评估中心)的d量级可以比以前认为的大得多。确实,某些预测变量(例如工作样本)的ds可能与纸笔认知测试有关。我们为研究人员和从业人员提供了更现实的d值。指出了对实践和未来研究的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号