Staffing and Selection

Question 1

Adverse impact/**

Answer 1

Using a selection procedure, like a test, in a way that discriminates against a legally protected minority, such that the minority’s selection ratio is less than 80%. (Remember the 4/5 rule!)

Question 2

Assessment center*

Answer 2

Method of evaluating applicants for a job at a dedicated facility using multiple evaluators and and work samples like role-plays and in-basket exercises.

Question 3

Base-rate (in selection)***

Answer 3

Proportion of an organization’s workforce in a job who meet minimum standards of performance.

Question 4

Bio-data*

Answer 4

Biographical data collected in job applications about facts from life- and work-history potentially related to job performance.

Question 5

Content Validity*

Answer 5

Extent to which a psychological test or other measure of an attribute represents the entire domain of the attribute.

Question 6

Cutoff Score (in selection)

Answer 6

In selection, the score on a predictor below which applicants for the job are rejected.

Question 7

Criterion-related validity*

Answer 7

Extent to which values from measurement of an attribute correlate with values yielded by an established measure of the same attribute.

Question 8

Decision Accuracy***

Answer 8

The proportion of correct hiring decisions based on a cut-off score of the predictor, including correct positive and correct negative decisions.

Question 9

False negative decision

Answer 9

Deciding not to hire a job applicant who scores below the cut-off score on predictor of job-performance, when that applicant could actually perform above the minimum standard for the job.

Question 10

False positive decision

Answer 10

Making a positive decision to hire a job applicant whose score on the predictors of job performance exceed the cut-off score, but the applicant fails to meet the minimum standard of performance on the job.

Question 11

Multiple hurdles (in selection)

Answer 11

Series of two or more assessments used to screen job applicants, in which the first serves to screen applicants before they progress to the second, and so on.

Question 12

Predictor variable*

Answer 12

Variable that correlates with a second (criterion) variable measured at a later time.

Also, a Measure of an attribute considered essential for job performance, used for selection.

Question 13

Predictor validity*

Answer 13

Correlation between scores on a predictor of job performance and later scores on a criterion measure of performance.

Question 14

Realistic job preview*

Answer 14

Accurate information given to job applicants during the application process about both job and organization.

Question 15

Reliability of measurement*/**

Answer 15

Consistency or reproducibility of a procedure for assigning values to an attribute to positions on a continuum or to categories.

Question 16

Selection ratio/**

Answer 16

Proportion of applicants for a job who receive job offers.

Question 17

Structured Interview

Answer 17

Scorable series of job-specific questions, asked to applicants face-to-face, about work scenarios and work history.

Question 18

Work Sample

Answer 18

Set of tasks designed to resemble those in a job, given to job-applicants to perform under job-like conditions, scored on performance criteria similar to those of a job, and used as a predictor for selection or other purposes.

Question 19

Validity of measurement*

Answer 19

Correspondence of values from a measurement procedure with values of the target attribute.

Question 20

Validity Coefficient*

Answer 20

Correlation of a predictor of job performance with a criterion measure (to demonstrate predictive validity).
-OR-
Correlation of a measure of an individual attribute with scores on an established measure of the same attribute to demonstrate validity of measurement.

Question 21

Adverse impact example

Answer 21

A blue-print reading test used to screen applicants for a construction job has a selection ratio of 20% for Hispanic applicants, but 30% for others.

.8 X .3 = .24, which is the minimum.

Question 22

Assessment center example

Answer 22

General Motors assessment center for assemblers that included scored, group assembly of auto-parts while observed by raters.

Question 23

Bio-data example

Answer 23

Having held an elected office in high-school.

Question 24

Content validity example

Answer 24

A test of intelligence included items representing all, established facets of intelligence, including spatial ability, numerical ability, etc.

Question 25

Criterion-related validity example

Answer 25

Correlation of scores on a new measure of Extraversion with scores on NEO-PI Extraversion scale. The resulting correlation is called a validity coefficient.

Question 26

Predictor variable example

Answer 26

Applicants for a job of assembler at Ford do a work sample calling for repeating an auto assembly task, scored on time and accuracy, which is then used for selection.

Question 27

Predictive validity example

Answer 27

Among 60 recently-hired assemblers, scores on a pre-employment work-sample correlate with r= +.55 with supervisor’s ratings of first-year job performance.

Question 28

Realistic job preview example

Answer 28

Video shown to job applicants for the job of bank teller that accurately depicts its benefits, like health insurance and drawbacks, like difficult customers and deadlines.

Question 29

Reliabilty of measurement example

Answer 29

Retest reliability, alternate forms reliability, and internal consistency.

Question 30

Selection ratio example

Answer 30

If 50 individuals apply for the job of assembler at a GM plant, and 10 are offered the job, then the selection rate is 10/50 = 20%.

Question 31

Validity of measurement example

Answer 31

Criterion-related validity, content validity.

Question 32

Validity coefficient example (2 parts)

Answer 32

Among the 50 secretaries most recently hired at a university, individual scores on the required, pre-employment keying test correlate with supervisor’s ratings of performance in the first year.
-OR-
Scores on new test of general mental ability completed by 500 volunteers correlates with their scores on the Stanford-Binet test at r= +.8.