Initial investigation into computer scoring of candidate essays for personnel selection.

Michael C. Campion · Michael A. Campion · Emily D. Campion · Matthew H. Reider

130 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Applied Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

AI and HR Technologies Employer Branding and e-HRM Computational and Text Analysis Methods

Abstract

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 101(7) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2016-32115-001). In the article the affiliations for Emily D. Campion and Matthew H. Reider were originally incorrect. All versions of this article have been corrected.] Emerging advancements including the exponentially growing availability of computer-collected data and increasingly sophisticated statistical software have led to a "Big Data Movement" wherein organizations have begun attempting to use large-scale data analysis to improve their effectiveness. Yet, little is known regarding how organizations can leverage these advancements to develop more effective personnel selection procedures, especially when the data are unstructured (text-based). Drawing on literature on natural language processing, we critically examine the possibility of leveraging advances in text mining and predictive modeling computer software programs as a surrogate for human raters in a selection context. We explain how to "train" a computer program to emulate a human rater when scoring accomplishment records. We then examine the reliability of the computer's scores, provide preliminary evidence of their construct validity, demonstrate that this practice does not produce scores that disadvantage minority groups, illustrate the positive financial impact of adopting this practice in an organization (N ∼ 46,000 candidates), and discuss implementation issues. Finally, we discuss the potential implications of using computer scoring to address the adverse impact-validity dilemma. We suggest that it may provide a cost-effective means of using predictors that have comparable validity but have previously been too expensive for large-scale screening. (PsycINFO Database Record

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

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

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 130 citations exist upstream.

References

1963The Structure of Scientific Revolutions 2007Answers to 20 Questions About Interrater Reliability and Interrater Agreement 1994The validity of employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis.2001Determinants, Detection and Amelioration of Adverse Impact in Personnel Selection Procedures: Issues, Evidence and Lessons Learned 2008THE DIVERSITY–VALIDITY DILEMMA: STRATEGIES FOR REDUCING RACIOETHNIC AND SEX SUBGROUP DIFFERENCES AND ADVERSE IMPACT IN SELECTION 2008THE DIVERSITY–VALIDITY DILEMMA: OVERVIEW AND LEGAL CONTEXT

Cited by

2018When your resume is (not) turning you down: Modelling ethnic bias in resume screening 2019“Where’s the I-O?” Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Talent Management Systems 2023Responsible artificial intelligence in human resources management: a review of the empirical literature 2018Psychology Meets Machine Learning: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Algorithmic Job Candidate Screening 2020Changing the means of managerial work: effects of automated decision support systems on personnel selection tasks 2022Should I Trust the Artificial Intelligence to Recruit? Recruiters’ Perceptions and Behavior When Faced With Algorithm-Based Recommendation Systems During Resume Screening

Explore the map →

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

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.