Evaluations of Tests Used for Making Selection and Promotion Decisions

Abstract

Participants (N= 212) rated the fairness, job relevance, appropriateness, and invasiveness of 16 tests that could be used to select or promote people into production or management positions. Fairness, job relevance and appropriateness were highly correlated, and were combined to form a composite evaluation scale. Evaluations and invasiveness ratings varied among the 16 tests, with the most positive ratings given to interviews and work samples and the most negative ratings given to astrology, graphology and polygraphs. Evaluations of four tests were affected by the position (manager vs. production worker). Evaluations of 11 tests and invasiveness ratings of two tests were affected by respondent experience with the test. Respondents who had experienced the tests evaluated them more positively and considered them to entail a smaller invasion of privacy. Responses were not affected by whether the test was to be used for selection versus promotion decisions.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 47 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.