Psyc3050 Exam 2

Front 1

any variable used to forecast a criterion.

Back 1

Predictor:

Front 2

Assessing the quality of predictors\

judge goodness of our measuring devices by two - reliability & validity

Back 2

Psychometric criteria:

Front 3

reliability and validity. Literally the measurement of properties of the mind. The standard used to measure the quality of psychological assessments.

Back 3

psychometric criteria

Front 4

refers to the consistency, stability, or equivalence of a measure. A standard for evaluating tests that refers to the consistency, stability, or equivalence of test scores. Often contrasted with validity.

Back 4

Reliability:

Front 5

perhaps simplest assessment of a measuring device's reliability. Measure something at different times and compare the scores. Generally shorter time intervals between yield higher scores. A type of reliability that reveals the stability of test scores upon repeated applications of the test.

contains

Correlation of two test scores is a coefficient of stability - reflects stability of test over time.

Back 5

Test-Retest Reliability:

Coefficient of stability:

Front 6

second type of reliability - aka parallel form reliability. Two forms of tests to measure the same attribute and gives both forms to the same group of people. A type of reliability that reveals the equivalence of test scores between two versions or forms of the test.

contains

Correlation of the two sets of scores is this, reflect the extent to which the two forms are equivalent measures of the same concept.

Back 6

Equivalent-Form Reliability:

Coefficient of equivalence:

Front 7

two types - extent to which it has homogenous content. A type of reliability that reveals the homogeneity of the items comprising a test.

Back 7

Internal-Consistency Reliability:

Split-half reliability:

Cronbach’s alpha or Kuder-Richardson 20:

Front 8

test given to a group of people, but in scoring, items on test are divided in half - into odd and even numbered. Each person thus gets two scores. If test is internally consistent, high degree of similarity in the responses should be present. The longer the test, the greater the reliability.

Back 8

Split-half reliability:

Front 9

second technique of internal-consistency reliability to compute one of those two coefficients. Both similar though not statistically identical. Each 100 item test consists of 100 minitest. Response of each item is correlated with response of other. Matrix of correlations formed. If test is homogenous - content similar, high reliability. If heterogeneous - content cover wide concepts - not internally consistent.

Back 9

Cronbach’s alpha or Kuder-Richardson 20:

Front 10

a type of reliability that reveals the degree of agreement among the assessments of two or more raters. Also called conspect reliability.

Back 10

Inter-rater reliability:

Front 11

refers to accuracy. A standard for evaluating tests that refers to the accuracy of appropriateness of drawing inferences from test scores. Often contrasted with reliability.

Back 11

Validity:

Front 12

theoretical concept we propose to explain aspects of behavior

Back 12

Construct:

Front 13

degree to which a test is an accurate and faithful measure of the construct it purports to measure

Back 13

Construct validity:

Front 14

correlation coefficients reflect the degree to which these scores converge – or come together – in assessing a common concept

Back 14

Convergent validity coefficients:

Front 15

correlation coefficients should be very low in – separate from concepts not related to what we want to measure. Reflect the degree to which these scores diverge from each other in assessing unrelated concepts.

Back 15

Divergent validity coefficients:

Front 16

the degree to which a test forecasts or is statistically related to a criterion. Refers to how much a predictor relates to a criterion.

Back 16

Criterion-Related Validity:

Front 17

used to diagnose the existing status of some criterion. Concerned with how well a predictor can predict a criterion at the same time, or concurrently. Predict student gpa on basis of test score.

Back 17

Concurrent criterion-related validity:

Front 18

used to forecast future status. Collect predictor information and use it to forecast future performance. High school gpa indicator of college performance.

Back 18

Predictive criterion-related validity:

Front 19

a statistical index (often expressed as a correlation coefficient) that reveals the degree of association between two variables. Often used in the context of prediction. When predictor scores are correlated with criterion data, the results correlation is this.

Back 19

Validity coefficient:

Front 20

degree to which subject matter experts agree that the items in a test are a representative sample of the domain of knowledge the test purports to measure. Degree to which predictor covers a representative sample of the behavior being assessed.

Back 20

Content Validity:

Front 21

appearance that items in a test are appropriate for the intended use of the test by the individuals who take the test. Concerned with appearance of test items.

Back 21

Face Validity:

Front 22

Predictor development

Two dimensions to classify predictors

Back 22

1. whether the predictor seeks to measure directly the underlying psychological construct in question (mechanical comprehension), or whether it seeks to measure sample of the same behavior to be exhibited on the job.
2 whether they seek to measure something about the individual currently or something about the individual in the past.

Front 23

Psychological tests and inventories

Test v. inventory:

Back 23

in a test the answers are either right or wrong, but in an inventory there are no right or wrong answers.

Front 24

method of assessment in which the responses to questions are recorded and interpreted but are not evaluated in terms of their correctness, as in a vocational interest inventory.

Back 24

Inventory:

Front 25

Types of tests

Back 25

Types of tests

Front 26

Speed versus Power Tests

Back 26

Speed: type of test that has a precise time limit; a person's score on the test is the number of items attempted in the time period. Often contrasted with a power test.

Power: type of test that usually does not have a precise time limit; a person's score on the test is the number of items answered correctly. Often contrasted with a speed test.

Front 27

type of test that has a precise time limit; a person's score on the test is the number of items attempted in the time period. Often contrasted with a power test.

Back 27

Speed:

Front 28

type of test that usually does not have a precise time limit; a person's score on the test is the number of items answered correctly. Often contrasted with a speed test.

Back 28

Power:

Front 29

Individual versus Group Tests

Back 29

Individual: type of test that is administered to more than one test taker at a time. Often contrasted with an individual test.
Group: type of test that is administered to more than one test taker at a time. Often contrasted with an individual test.

Front 30

type of test that is administered to more than one test taker at a time. Often contrasted with an individual test.

Back 30

Individual:

Front 31

type of test that is administered to more than one test taker at a time. Often contrasted with an individual test.

Back 31

Group:

Front 32

Paper-and-Pencil versus Performance Tests

Back 32

Paper-and-pencil: method of assessment in which the responses to questions are recorded on a piece of paper.
Performance: type of test that requires test taker to exhibit physical skill in the manipulation of objects, as in a typing test.

Front 33

method of assessment in which the responses to questions are recorded on a piece of paper.

Back 33

Paper-and-pencil:

Front 34

type of test that requires test taker to exhibit physical skill in the manipulation of objects, as in a typing test.

Back 34

Performance:

Front 35

Ethical standards in testing

issued guidelines and user qualifications to ensure that tests are administered and interpreted correctly.

Back 35

APA code of professional ethics:

Front 36

sometimes must be licensed professional psychologist especially in clinical psychology, to prevent misuse and maintain test security, restrictions are placed on who has access to tests.

Back 36

Test user qualifications:

Front 37

condition pertaining to the asking of questions that are unrelated to the assessment's intent or are inherently intrusive.

Back 37

Invasion of privacy:

Front 38

condition associated with testing pertaining to which parties have access to test results.

Back 38

Confidentiality:

Front 39

Sources of information about testing

classic set of reference books in psychology that provide reviews and critiques of published test in the public domain.

Back 39

Mental Measurements Yearbook (MMY):

Front 40

less detailed books – resemble bibliographies and help locate tests in the MMY.

Back 40

Tests in Print VII:

Front 41

tests classified according to content.

Back 41

Test content:

Front 42

no singular/standard means to assess it.

Back 42

Intelligence tests:

Front 43

symbol for "general mental ability" which has been found to be predictive of success in jobs

Back 43

“g”:

Front 44

proposed three party theory of intelligence. Academic intelligence as representing what intelligence tests typically measure such as fluency with words and numbers. Practical intelligence which is intelligence needed to be competent in the everyday world and is not highly related to academic intelligence and creative intelligence which pertains to the ability to produce work that is both novel – original or unexpected – and appropriate – useful (writing, art, advertising, etc.).

Back 44

Sternberg’s triarchic theory of intelligence:

Front 45

require person to recognize which mechanical principle is suggested by test item – underlying concepts measure by these are sound, heat conductance, velocity, gravity, and force. Bennett Test of Mechanical Comprehension.

Back 45

Mechanical aptitude tests:

Front 46

do not have right or wrong answers – test takers answer how much they agree with certain statements.

Back 46

Personality inventories:

Front 47

predicated upon 16 personality types – each type is created by person's status on four bipolar dimensions: extraversion – introversion, sensing – intuition, thinking – feeling, and judgment – perception.

Back 47

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator:

Front 48

theory that defines personality in terms of five major factors: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Also called the "five factor" theory of personality.

Back 48

Big five theory of personality:

Front 49

person's characteristic level of stability vs instability.

Back 49

Neuroticism:

Front 50

tendency to be sociable, assertive, active, talkative, energetic, and outgoing.

Back 50

Extraversion:

Front 51

the disposition to be curious, imaginative, and unconventional.

Back 51

Openness to experience:

Front 52

disposition to be cooperative, helpful, and easy to get along with.

Back 52

Agreeableness:

Front 53

disposition to be purposeful, determined, and organized, and controlled.

Back 53

Conscientiousness:

Front 54

general personality factor reflect ability to cope, parallel to the g factor in intelligence.

Back 54

“p-factor”:

Front 55

type of test that purports to assess a candidate's honesty or character.

Back 55

Integrity tests:

Front 56

job applicant clearly understands that the intent of test is to assess integrity – two sections – one deals with attitudes toward theft and other forms of dishonesty and second deals with admissions of theft and other illegal activities such as dollar amounts stolen etc.

Back 56

Overt integrity tests:

Front 57

makes no reference to theft. Contain conventional personality assessment items that have been found to be predictive of theft.

Back 57

Personality-based measures:

Front 58

total set of physical abilities may be reduced to three major constructs: strength, endurance, and movement quality.

Back 58

Physical abilities:

Front 59

type of test that describes a problem to the test taker and requires the test taker to rate various possible solutions in terms of their feasibility or applicability.

Back 59

Situational judgment tests:

Front 60

CAT – form of assessment using a computer in which the questions have been precalibrated in terms of difficulty, and the examinee's response (right/wrong) to one question determines the selection of the next question.

Back 60

Computerized adaptive testing:

Front 61

Interviews

format for the job interview which the questions are different across all candidates. Often contrasted with structured.

Back 61

Unstructured:

Front 62

format for job interview in which the questions are consistent across all candidates. Often contrasted with unstructured.

Back 62

Structured:

Front 63

type of job interview in which candidates are presented with a problem and asked how they would respond to it.

Back 63

Situational interviews:

Front 64

Experience-based v. situational questions

Back 64

Experience-based: think about time you had to motivate employee to perform task that he disliked – how did you handle it?

Situational: suppose you were working with an employee who you knew greatly disliked a job task, what would you do to motivate?

Front 65

people generally place confidence in highly fallible interview judgments: that is, we are not good judges of people, but we think we are.

Back 65

“Illusion of validity”:

Front 66

technique for assessing job candidates in a specific location using a series of structured, group-oriented exercises that are evaluated by raters.

Back 66

Assessment centers:

Front 67

type of personnel selection test in which the candidate demonstrates proficiency on a task representative of the work performed in the job.

Back 67

Work samples:

Front 68

fidelity refers to the level of realism in the assessment. Literal description of a work sample is that the candidate is asked to perform a representative sample of the work done on the job, such as using a word processor, driving a forklift, etc.

Back 68

High-fidelity simulations:

Front 69

method of assessment in which examinees are presented with a problem and asked how they would respond to it.

Back 69

Situational exercises:

Front 70

mirror only part of job; thereby, present applicants with only a description of work problem and require them to describe how they would deal with it.

Back 70

Low-fidelity simulations:

Front 71

carefully designed letters, memos, brief reports, etc. require applicant's immediate attention and response. Applicant goes through the contents of basket and takes the appropriate action to solve the problems presented, such as making phone call, etc. observers score the applicant on such factors as productivity and problem solving effectiveness.

Back 71

In-basket Exercise:

Front 72

LGD – group applicants, normally 2 to 8, engage in job related discussion in which no spokesperson or group leader has been named. Raters observe and assess each on factors of prominence, goal facilitation, and sociability.

Back 72

Leaderless Group Discussion:

Front 73

method of assessing individuals in which info pertaining to past activities, interests, and behaviors in their lives is considered.

Back 73

Biographical information:

Front 74

commonly used and least valid

Back 74

Letters of recommendation:

Front 75

method of assessment typically used to detect illicit drug used by the candidate.

Back 75

Drug testing:

Screening test

Confirmation test

Front 76

New or controversial methods of assessment

Back 76

New or controversial methods of assessment

Front 77

instrument that assesses responses of an individual's central nervous system that supposedly indicate giving false responses to questions

Back 77

Polygraphy or Lie Detection:

Front 78

method of assessment in which characteristics of a person's handwriting are evaluated and interpreted.

Back 78

Graphology:

Front 79

construct that reflects a person's capacity to manage emotional responses in social situations.

Back 79

Tests of Emotional Intelligence:

Front 80

Overview and evaluation of predictors

refers to ability of the predictor to forecast criterion performance accurately. Many authorities argue that validity is the predominant evaluative standard in judging selection methods; however, the relevance of the other three standards are also substantial.

Back 80

Validity:

Front 81

refers to the ability of predictor to render unbiased predictions of job success across applicants in various subgroups of gender, race, age, and so on.

Back 81

Fairness:

Front 82

refers to whether the selection method can be applied across full range of jobs. Some predictors have wide applicability in that they appear well suited for diverse range of jobs; other methods have particular limitations that affect it.

Back 82

Applicability:

Front 83

many selection differ cost which has direct bearing on their overall value.

Back 83

Cost:

Front 84

Chapter Summary:

Back 84

Predictors are variables such as test, interview, letter of rec. used to forecast or predict a criterion.

High quality predictors must manifest two psychometric standards – reliability and validity.

Psychological tests and inventories have been used to predict relevant workplace criteria for more than 100 years.

Psychological assessment is a big business. There are many publishers of psychological tests used to assess candidates' suitability for employment.

Most commonly used predictors are tests of general mental ability, personality inventories, aptitude tests, and work samples, interviews and letters of rec.

Predictors can be evaluated in terms of their validity (accuracy), fairness, cost, and applicability.

Online testing is a major trend in psychological assessment.

Controversial methods of prediction include the polygraph, graphology, tests of emotional intelligence.

There are broad cross-cultural differences in predictors used to evaluate job candidates. Interview

Front 85

Reasons for Testing

*some of the more commonly cited reasons for testing are:

Back 85

-testing leads to savings in the decision-making process

-the costs of making a wrong decision are high

-the job requires attributes that are hard to develop or change

-hard-to-get information can be obtained more easily and efficiently

-individuals are treated consistently

*standardized testing system allows for everyone to be treated the same

-there are a lot of applicants

Front 86

What is a Test?

Back 86

standardized sample of behavior

Front 87

*what is measured

Back 87

-content

Front 88

*conditions of measurement

Back 88

-how the observations are made

Front 89

*interpretation of responses

Back 89

-how it is scored

Front 90

Terms and Concepts

Back 90

Terms and Concepts

Front 91

-a timed test; more speeded a test, the harder an applicant is to get through all of the items

-they are usually all the same difficulty level

Back 91

*speeded tests

Front 92

-untimed test that becomes more difficult as you go through it

Back 92

*power tests

Front 93

-timed test that gets difficult as you go through

-i.e. SAT

Back 93

*speeded power test

Front 94

individual tests are harder

-an individual or group completes the test

Back 94

*individual vs. group tests

Front 95

-test completed using paper and pencil

Back 95

*paper-and-pencil

Front 96

-testing done on a computer

-i.e. GRE

Back 96

*computer adaptive (based) testing

Front 97

Ethical Standards in Testing

Back 97

Ethical Standards in Testing

Front 98

-applies to all psychologists that interact with the public, but primarily to counseling

Back 98

*APA code of professional ethics

Front 99

-this is who is administering the test or has access to the test

Back 99

*Test user qualifications

Front 100

-you should never reveal too much information

Back 100

*invasion of privacy – reveal more information than necessary

Front 101

-i.e. co-workers should not have access to your scores

Back 101

*confidentiality – who should have access

Front 102

-there should always be some specification on how long records will be kept

Back 102

*retention of records

Front 103

Sources of Information about Testing

Back 103

*Mental Measurements Yearbook (MMY)

*Tests in Print VII

Front 104

Predictors & Tests

Back 104

Predictors & Tests

Front 105

are standardized measures of characteristics, skills, abilities, etc.

Back 105

*Tests

Front 106

are measures that are used to make predictions

Back 106

-predictors

>any measure (test/interview) can potentially be used to make predictions

Front 107

>actual criterion versus conceptual criterion

Back 107

-these are all actual criterion tests

Front 108

*Good prediction requires good measurement!

Back 108

*Distinction b/w tests and testing

-Tests: measurement instruments

-Testing: using of measurements to make decisions

Front 109

Evaluation of Predictors

*a four standard approach to evaluating personnel selection methods:

Back 109

1. validity and reliability

>validity: how well does this test assessment perform?

>reliability: consistency or stability of assessment

2. fairness of assessment

>i.e. cognitive abilities test

3. applicability/practicality

4. cost

Front 110

Psychometric Criteria for Tests: Reliability

Back 110

*consistency of measurement:

-occasions

>stability from one test event to another test event

-sample of items

-items within a test

-within/between test scorers

>is there a reliable conclusion about what kind of candidate a person is

*importance of reliability

-reliability sets the upper bound of validity.

-ranges b/w 0 to 1; the closer to 1 it is, the more reliable it is

-to get the upper bound, you take the reliability score and square it

-the highest correlation you can get is 0.81

-the higher the reliability, the better

Front 111

Estimating Reliability

Back 111

*Test-retest estimates

*Parallel forms estimates
-form A/ form B
> if you take both tests, you will score high on both or low on both

*Internal consistency estimates

*inter-rater reliability -the degree to which supervisors/interviewers view an individual

-i.e. one group sees a teacher as horrible, while others think the teacher is perfect

Front 112

Psychometric criteria for tests: Validity

Back 112

*attaching meaning to test scores

*appropriateness of inferences drawn from tests scores

*common kinds of inferential problems

Front 113

-the degree to which someone looks at your test, and says whether you did good or not

Back 113

content validity/subject matter experts

Front 114

-accurate and faithful measure of what you’re saying you’re measuring

-i.e. I say I’m assessing how extroverted someone is, but I test them on introversion

Back 114

construct validity

Front 115

versus face validity

Back 115

-assessed by the test taker (applicant)

-the degree to which test appears appropriate to the applicant

-is this assessment job relevant?

Front 116

criterion validity/predictive validity

Back 116

-the degree to which you can predict actual performance on an assessment

-i.e. if you do well on SAT, you will perform well the first year of college

Front 117

Criterion-related Validity Designs (will be on test)

Back 117

-concurrent designs

-predictive designs

-incremental designs

Front 118

-giving a test to current employees, then take test score to correlate test scores

-pros: it’s easy; quick

-cons: people who have the job are less motivated to do well on the test

Back 118

-concurrent designs

Front 119

-take job applicants and give them assessment, then hire them not based on assessment

-correlate test performance with actual job performance

-pros: preferred method; people are motivated to get the job

-cons: asking applicants to take an assessment that does not determine whether they get the job or not

Back 119

-predictive designs

Front 120

*problems with implementing criterion-related designs

-long time to get data

Back 120

-incremental designs

Front 121

Intelligence Tests / Cognitive ability measures.

◦ Almost always individualized assessment measures

◦ Most likely now to be on computer because it is more standardized

Back 121

Cab be Paper-and-pencil or Computer based (CBT or CAT)

Front 122

Intelligence Tests / Cognitive ability measures

GRE, IQ Tests

Back 122

General Intelligence Tests

Front 123

Intelligence Tests / Cognitive ability measures

Mechanical Aptitude- manipulate mechanical knowledge

Clerical Aptitude- proof reading

Spatial Aptitude- see figure and rotate in mind testing

Back 123

◦ Aptitude Tests

Front 124

Sample Cognitive Ability Content – things they assess of you

Back 124

 Verbal Comprehension

 Numerical Ability

 Visual Speed And Accuracy

 Space Visualization- pile of blocks, rotate to identify correct answer

 Numerical Reasoning- pattern finding, mathematical algorithm

 Word Fluency- can articulate things quickly, vocabulary

Front 125

big right now, given four symbols changing and evolving, and you have to pick what comes next

Back 125

Symbolic Reasoning-

Front 126

not a function of language and not based on experiences, so you can use it in multiple languages. This is a huge benefit for large corporations.

Back 126

Symbolic Reasoning-

Front 127

Mechanical Aptitude Tests: Bennett-Mechanical Test

Back 127

PICTURE/GRAPH

Front 128

Sensory/Motor Ability Tests

Back 128

PICTURE/GRAPH

Front 129

Intelligence Tests / Cognitive ability measures

 Advantages

Back 129

◦ Reliability and Validity – high, if you demonstrate once, you can keep doing it

◦ *Best predictor of job performance (esp. verbal reasoning and numerical reasoning)

◦ Administration- easily administered, standardized, group setting, scoring automatically

◦ Costs- initially expensive, overtime it is minimal

Front 130

Intelligence Tests / Cognitive ability measures

 Disadvantages

Back 130

◦ Fairness- minorities score lower (women and African Americans score worse)

Front 131

◦ Based on the premise that the best predictor of future behavior is observed behavior under similar situations

Back 131

Work Samples

Front 132

Work Samples

 Advantages

Back 132

◦ Reliability and Validity high reliability

◦ Fairness- has nothing to do with systematic biases (minority groups), difficult to fake (you can either do it or not do it), high face validity (ex. Correcting a memo), provide realistic job preview

Front 133

Work Samples

 Disadvantages

Back 133

◦ Costly to administer- very expensive, usually one at a time, takes a long time, machine based work you have to take that machine offline, so you have a loss in production, potential damages (ex. Crashing a forklift)

◦ Administration issues- most jobs are much too complex for 30 minute work sample, not applicable, don’t get into aptitudes, evolve and changing

Front 134

Types of Sample Tests

Back 134

 In-Basket Exercises

 Role-Plays

Front 135

In-Basket exercises are typically designed to simulate the administrative tasks of a job. In the typical In-Basket, the test taker is given background information on either the actual organization or a fictitious company and is asked to assume a specific role in the organization. The test taker is often asked to respond to letters, memos, e-mails, requests, personnel issues, and so forth, in a given amount of time. A time limit may be imposed in order to simulate the time pressure experienced in many jobs. In-Basket exercises are usually designed to assess the candidate’s ability to manage multiple tasks, prioritize and delegate work, and analyze information quickly. In-Basket exercises may be administered via paper-and-pencil methods or via computer. Scoring of In-Baskets varies considerably, with some more easily scored via computerized templates and others requiring careful review by a trained evaluator.

Back 135

 In-Basket Exercises

Front 136

Role-Play exercises are designed to simulate the interpersonal challenges faced when working with others. In the typical role-play, the candidate is given background information regarding the scenario and asked to play a particular role (e.g., team leader, customer service representative). During the exercise, he or she interacts directly with a trained role-player (actor). This actor often plays the role of a subordinate, coworker, or customer and responds to the candidate according to a script. Role-Play exercises are usually designed to assess the candidate’s communication and interpersonal skills. Performance may be observed by a trained evaluator, or may be videotaped and evaluated at a later time. Very common for entry level jobs

Back 136

 Role-Plays

Front 137

Measures of Physical and Psychomotor skills

 Advantages

Back 137

◦ individuals who are physically unable to perform the job (select people who can do the job overtime)

◦ can result in decreased costs / decreased absenteeism- can result in decreased costs related to disability/medical claims, insurance, and workers compensation

◦ decreased absenteeism

Front 138

Measures of Physical and Psychomotor skills

 Disadvantages

Back 138

◦ Cost- costly to administer (ex. Obstacle courses are expensive to maintain)

◦ Validity- difficult to demonstrate validity (ex. Carrying 100 lbs for firefighter and their rules that if the person is over a certain weight they need 2 people to carry), requirements must be shown to be job related through a thorough job analysis

◦ Fairness- females and the older are disadvantaged, age based disparate impact

Front 139

Personality Inventories

Back 139

Personality Inventories

Front 140

A selection procedure that measures the personality characteristics of applicants that are related to future job performance.

Back 140

Personality Tests:

Front 141

Personality Tests:

Back 141

No ‘right v. wrong’ answers

 Scale scores to predict job success

◦ Type –Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

 16 Types relating to job-role preferences

Front 142

◦ *Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to experience, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness (OCEAN)

◦ Personality and Intelligence are not correlated

◦ Modest validity coefficients (.20) but have incremental validity

◦ Problem of social desirability – people want to present themselves nicely

Back 142

 Five-factor model personality (Big “5” Theory of Personality)

Front 143

Personality Tests:

 Advantages

Back 143

◦ More information- about applicant, can get interpersonal traits that correlate to the job

◦ Fairness

◦ Cost

Front 144

Personality Tests:

 Disadvantages

Back 144

◦ Measurement issues – hard to define personality characteristics

◦ *Experience not Personality- dictates job performance not personality

◦ Social Desirability- present yourself differently

◦ Diversity- when you get 5 extroverts you have too many leaders in one place

◦ Applicability- personality might not even matter

Front 145

Integrity Tests

Premise of Integrity Testing-

Back 145

 (general idea is to screen out people)

Front 146

Low productivity=

Back 146

 high counterproductive work behaviors

Front 147

 Types of Integrity Tests

Back 147

1. Overt integrity- obvious, apparent to applicant what is being asked

2. Personality-oriented- (covert), usually assessing level of consciousness, how trustworthy are you?

Front 148

 Other Considerations

Back 148

◦ Validity

◦ Big 5- personality, high integrity= low neuroticism

◦ Cognitive Ability- smarter people don’t steal less

◦ Fairness- women tend to score higher, older score higher, younger score lower, younger are more likely to report stealing, no race differences

◦ Faking- especially with overt integrity (duh)

◦ Cost- very expensive because they are proprietary methods (owned by companies)

Front 149

Interviews: The most common selection instrument

 Prohibited Interview Questions

Back 149

◦ Age
◦ Marital status / kids
◦ Religion
◦ Political affiliation
◦ Medical history
◦ Personal habits

Front 150

Interviews: The most common selection instrument

 Bad interview Questions

Back 150

◦ Where do you see yourself in five years?
◦ What are your weaknesses?
◦ What in particular interested you about our company?
◦ What would your past managers say about you?
◦ What is the airspeed of an unladen swallow?

Front 151

Types of Interviews

Back 151

 Unstructured Interview- bad, ask questions randomly, slightly different set of questions

 Structured Interviews- good, specific set of questions

Front 152

 Sub-types and-or types of questions

Back 152

◦ Situational Interview- applicant is give situation…

◦ Behavior Description Interviews- describe previous behaviors

◦ Structured Behavioral Interview- gold standard, asking about behavioral issues of past and everyone gets same questions

Front 153

Structured Behavioral Interview Examples

Back 153

 Describe the most creative work-related project you have completed.

 Give me an example of a problem you faced on the job, and tell me how you solved it.

 Give me an example of when you had to show good leadership.

 Give me an example of an important goal you had to set and tell me about your progress in reaching that goal.

 Tell me about a situation in the past year in which you had to deal with a very upset customer or co-worker.

Front 154

Responding well to these types of questions

 The "S.T.A.R." technique – Describe:

Back 154

◦ the Situation and/or the Task you needed to accomplish
◦ the Action you took
◦ the Results

Front 155

Responding well to these types of questions

 Be specific

Back 155

◦ Not general or vague

Front 156

Responding well to these types of questions

 Don't describe how you would behave

Back 156

◦ Describe how you did actually behave

Front 157

Responding well to these types of questions

 If you later decided you should have behaved differently, explain

Back 157

◦ The employer will see that you learned something from experience

Front 158

Evaluating Interview Answer

Back 158

PICTURE/GRAPH

Front 159

Interview

• Advantages

Back 159

▫ Very helpful in interviewing managers

▫ Criterion related validity = .39

▫ Most commonly used method of selection

▫ Validity hard to demonstrate yet “illusion of validity” is common bias

▫ Serves other personnel functions, e.g. degree of fit

Front 160

Interview

• Disadvantages

Back 160

▫ Reliability and Validity
▫ Fairness
▫ Cost

Front 161

Biographical Information

Back 161

 Previous life experience to predict success

 Often recorded on application blank

Front 162

Biographical Information

 Usefulness:

Back 162

◦ Can predict as high as .30-.40 range

◦ Reveals consistent patterns of behavior

◦ Often locates unique criterion variance

Front 163

Biographical Information

 Legally defensible, but problematic:

Back 163

◦ Fairness issues
◦ Invasive
◦ “Fakable”

Front 164

Assessment Centers

• Standardized evaluation with multiple evaluations

Back 164

▫ job-related simulations,
▫ interviews,
▫ and/or psychological tests

Front 165

• Traditional Activities

Back 165

▫ Leaderless Group Discussion
 Problems with this technique

▫ Role Playing
 Problems with this technique

Front 166

• Four Characteristics:

Back 166

1. Managers – selection, promotion, training

2. Assessed in groups against performance of other groups

3. Assessor teams as raters

4. Variety of group exercises and inventories over 1-3 days

Front 167

• Criterion Contamination (Validity found is due to shared stereotypes)

Back 167

1. Actual
2. Subtle
3. Self-fulfilling prophecy
4. Performance consistency
5. Managerial Situational Exercises

Front 168

Letters of Recommendation

Back 168

 Commonly used and least valid
 Restricted range
 Only useful if negative

Front 169

Drug Testing

Back 169

 Substance abuse is major global problem

Front 170

Drug Testing

 Two types of assessments

Back 170

◦ Screening test
◦ Confirmation test

Front 171

Drug Testing

Back 171

 Problems of reliability and validity

 Practical issues
◦ Cost savings
◦ Issues of uniform drug testing
◦ Some issues outside the scope of I/O Psychology

Front 172

Tests of Emotional Intelligence

 Five dimensions

Back 172

◦ Three intrapersonal
 Knowing one’s emotions
 Managing one’s emotions
 Motivating oneself

◦ Two interpersonal
 Recognizing emotions in others
 Handling relationships

Front 173

Tests of Emotional Intelligence

 Issues:

Back 173

◦ Conceptual overlap with Personality

◦ Enormous controversy and still not well-established

Front 174

The Value of Testing

 Trends:

Back 174

◦ Tyranny of testing

◦ Some tests are useful in predicting job performance, some are not

◦ As a class, moderately predictive, but could be due to poor criteria

Front 175

The Value of Testing

 New Test Methods:

Back 175

◦ Situational judgment test
◦ Online computer testing emerges

Front 176

Multiple Predictors

 It’s not usually a question of which predictor to choose -- it is more often a question of which predictors to choose or which predictor to ADD

Back 176

 Multiple predictors should provide:

◦ RELEVANT information (validity of X)

◦ UNIQUE information (validity of X1 + X2)

Front 177

Chapter 5: Personnel Decisions

Back 177

Chapter 5: Personnel Decisions

Front 178

Personnel Selection Occurs in a larger context

-personnel decisions in the new millennium

Back 178

*speed of technological change

*use of teams to accomplish work

*changes in communication technology

*most large corporations are new global in nature

*service orientation

Front 179

Testing: Making Selection Decisions

-When making selection decision there are basically 2 primary outcomes

*they are?

Back 179

-negative or positive; you get hired or not

Front 180

*quality of outcomes

Back 180

-were they a good candidate to hire

Front 181

-features of testing that affect

Back 181

-features of testing that affect

Front 182

-min level of performance to either move on in process or get hired

-the higher the cutoff score, the more selective the company is

Back 182

*cutoff scores

Front 183

-how picky is the organizations

-ranges from 0-1

-the higher the ratio, the less picky the organization is

Back 183

*selection ratios

Front 184

-min level of performance to be defined as successful
>i.e. you can get a min of a D in a class and still pass

-low base rate, company is going to fail

Back 184

*standards for success and base rates

Front 185

Decision Outcome Analysis

Back 185

PICTURE/GRAPH

Front 186

Evaluation of Testing

Back 186

-Decision utility of testing systems
*improving on the base rate
-is this a good selection system?
*focus on hires vs. all candidates

Front 187

Benefits of correct outcomes

Back 187

if you reject stupid people, then you won’t have to replace them later

Front 188

Costs of incorrect outcomes

Back 188

-moral issues

-hire someone who can’t do the job, and they ruin something on the job

Front 189

Costs of testing procedures

Back 189

-can be time consuming

Front 190

Costs of tradeoffs of selection vs. other approaches to staffing

Back 190

-nepotism (not what you know, but who you know)

*very effective b/c you know the person well

*can be ineffective b/c of slacking of the person, other people in company can’t advance

Front 191

Impact of selection ratio: focus on hires

Back 191

*focus on people you brought to the job

*situation 1: cutoff low
-true positives and false positives

*situation 2: selection ratio goes down, increase cutoff

*situation 3: cutoff is higher, ratio is lower

****higher the passing standards, the higher the success rates
****50 % passing standard maximizes overall correct decision rate ability test (r=.53)
****the more valid the test, you reduce false positives and false negatives
-make fewer bad decisions

Front 192

Impact of Selection ratio on outcomes: Focus of Hires

Back 192

PICTURE/GRAPH

Front 193

Impact of Selection Ratio on outcomes: Focus on All Candidates

Back 193

PICTURE/GRAPH

Front 194

Multiple hurdle approach:

Back 194

Each predictor evaluated independently
-predictors are hurdles

Each predictor has a cutoff score
-a cutoff score is a minimally acceptable score on a predictor
Applicants pass if they exceed the cutoff scores for each predictor

Front 195

Multiple Hurdle Approach

Back 195

PICTURE/GRAPH

Front 196

Regression Approach

Back 196

-a statistical procedure, allows us to forecast a criterion from a predictor

-very similar to correlation

Front 197

What if we have more than one predictor?

Back 197

Multiple Regression

Front 198

R= the relationship b/w the set of predictors, and those 3 things as a group has on the predicted job performance

Back 198

-the correlation b/w criterion and 2 or more predictors

-ranges from 0-1

Front 199

-the size of R is dependent on

Back 199

-relation of each predictor to the criterion

-relations b/w the predictors
*the more predictive, the lower the R

-predictors should be as independent from one another as possible

Front 200

-R2 is the square of the multiple correlations

Back 200

-assessment of the variance
-this value indicates the amount of variance in the criterion accounted for by the predictors

Front 201

Example Predictors – Uncorrelated
Example Predictors- Correlated

Back 201

PICTURE/GRAPH

Front 202

Selection with Multiple Regression-

Back 202

way to combine multiple pieces simultaneously

Front 203

Selection with Multiple Regression- way to combine multiple pieces simultaneously

Back 203

 Develop equation

 Assess people

 Compute Y for all people- what do you think their performance will be?

 Hire the people with the highest Y’s

 Outcome is a regression equation

◦ Y = a + b1X1 + b2X2 + …… bkXk

◦ a=constant, b1X1= weight, how important is the assessment tool in predicting job performance (the higher= more important)

Front 204

Multiple Regression: Which Do We Choose?

Back 204

Y = 12 + .25 (Know.) + .50 (Abil.) + .25 (Consc.)

Front 205

Network knowledge, cognitive ability, & conscience

Back 205

PICTURE/GRAPH

Front 206

Multiple Regression: Which Do We Choose?

Back 206

- Pick person with highest Y

- Sometimes referred to as a compensatory model, if bad at one section other sections can bring them up, have chance to get a job (ex. College admissions)

- Antithesis to a hurdle procress (opposite)

Front 207

Using Multiple Predictors

Back 207

(* Don’t really need to know differences for the test)

Front 208

Using Multiple Predictors (* Don’t really need to know differences for the test)

Back 208

 Compensatory models

 Non-compensatory models- hurdle process, same

 Sequential strategies- not quite standardized, but like a hurdle

 Clinical decision making- do not do when hiring, “gut feeling”

Front 209

Costs of Available Measures:

Back 209

◦ Intelligence Tests / Cognitive ability measures = $20 per applicant

◦ Work Samples = $55 per applicant

◦ Interview = $35 per applicant

◦ Measures of physical & psychomotor skills = $30 per applicant

◦ Personality inventories = $40 per applicant

◦ Assessment center = $75 per applicant

◦ Integrity tests = $40 per applicant

Front 210

Validity Generalization

Back 210

- Idea that if it’s been shown to be valid/ predictive in one scenario it will be again. The farther you go away from original, more varying validity- generalizability decreases

Front 211

What is banding? ( he didn’t actually go over this part he said just read the rest in the book)

 What is band width a function of?

 Banding and selection ratio

 Types of banding

Back 211

READ IN BOOK!!!!!!

Front 212

Uniform Guidelines (on Employee Selection Procedures) – aka the Bible

-How to do selection ethically and legally

Back 212

 A template for doing selection legally

Front 213

 Two legal bases for discrimination

Back 213

◦ Adverse impact-
◦ Disparate impact-

Front 214

discrimination in which use of a specific selection instrument adversely affects on protective group, because of the test not the group (ex. Cognitive abilities test: white males score higher than black males, and women are negatively affected)

legally identified minority, includes: females, Hispanics, Asians, National origin groups, religious groups, non- Christian, age (Higher than 40 are protected), disability (mental or physical)

Back 214

◦ Adverse impact-

 Protective groups-

Front 215

when a protected group gets special treatment (+ of -) (ex. Gender, race, sexual orientation)

Back 215

◦ Disparate impact-

Front 216

Adverse Impact (4/5ths Rule or 80%) * no math on the test

Back 216

GRAPH

 In other words,
◦ you hire a larger percentage of non-protected class employees
- Less than 4/5ths, then you have adverse impact, if you hire too big a percentage of non protected class

Front 217

Adverse Impact

Back 217

PICTURE/GRAPH

Front 218

Adverse Impact- Common Methods

Back 218

 Cognitive abilities -YES
 Physical abilities – YES, gender, physical
 Spatial abilities – YES, women
 Personality- NO
 Assessment Centers- NO
 Interviews- NO, sometimes, usually not though

Front 219

Adverse Impact

 What if we find adverse impact?

Back 219

◦ The organization is obligated to use another method OR validate the method
 Implication: No validation necessary if no adverse impact
 Implication: Adverse impact is okay if the measure is valid- if it can accurately predict job performance

Front 220

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Back 220

 “It is unlawful to fail to hire or otherwise discriminate against an individual because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, national origin OR

◦ to limit, segregate, or classify employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive any individual of employment opportunities because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, national origin”

 Exemptions: BFOQ, Seniority, Testing- can still occur, BFOQ (Bona fide Occupational Qualifications) – if you have to have this to do the job (ex. Catholic church against protestants), seniority- hired first, then they are fired last

- Was very controversial, tried to get it to fail by including sex

- For any employment decision it cannot unfairly discriminate

- *Which group is not listed here? Age1

Front 221

Civil Rights Act of 1964- Title VII

Back 221

 Addressed all personnel functions

 Applies to all organizations with 15+ employees, except

◦ Private clubs
◦ Employment places connected with Indian Reservations
◦ Religious Organizations

 Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC)- created

◦ Investigates allegations of discrimination

◦ Issues regulations regarding compliance with Title VII

◦ Gathers employment information

Front 222

Guidelines for Employee Testing Procedures

Back 222

 1964 -- CRA established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

 1966 -- EEOC created Guidelines for Employee Testing Procedures

 1972 -- CRA created Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinating Council- up until this point they could do nothing, “toothless tiger”, now they start having ability to react

 1978 -- Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures

◦ systematic record keeping of employment decisions

◦ adverse impact and four-fifths or 80% rule

Front 223

Civil Rights Act of 1991

Back 223

 Disparate impact is codified and written into law for the first time

 Shifted burden of proof back to employer; once disparate impact is shown employer must show job relatedness of selection practices

 Allowed (a) limited punitive damages and (b) jury trials to award damages

- Democrat in office, then employees are favored, Republican in office, then companies are favored

Front 224

Specific Supreme Court Cases- Read this in the Book …!!!!!!

Back 224

 Griggs vs. Duke Power Company (1971)

◦ Burdon of proof on the defendant – “Griggs Burdon”

◦ Albermarle Paper Co. vs. Moody (1975)

◦ Organizations must use rigorous validation procedures

Front 225

Specific Supreme Court Cases- Read this in the Book …!!!!!!

Back 225

 Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967

◦ Protects people over age of 40 from discrimination on the basis of age

◦ Age can be qualification if it is a BFOQ

Front 226

 Americans with Disabilities Act (1990)- ADA Law

Back 226

◦ employment protection for individuals with disabilities (physical or mental impairment that substantially limits life activities) who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the position

◦ must allow opportunity for comparable performance

 ex. Blind using computers
 ex. Wheelchair ramps

Front 227

Specific Supreme Court Cases

Back 227

 Bakke vs. Regents of the University of California (1978)

◦ Holding positions for certain classes is illegal

Front 228

Specific Supreme Court Cases

Back 228

 Price Waterhouse vs. Hopkins (1989)

◦ Decisions cannot be made on the basis of stereotypes – whether they “fit the job”

Front 229

EEOC Statistics Slide

Back 229

- Women- most likely to win employment discrimination cases
- Disabilities- most likely to bring up cases

Front 230

Fairness Issues in Testing – he said to read rest in book!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Back 230

 Meeting dual goals
◦ High performance
◦ Diversity

 Adverse impact, validity, and alternative predictors

 ADA: Standardization vs. Accommodation

 Emphasizing other staffing strategies

 Applicant reactions

Front 231

Placement and Classification

 We are predicting performance to decide which job a person should get

Back 231

◦ Placement
◦ Classification

Front 232

 3 Approaches

Back 232

◦ Vocational Guidance
◦ Pure selection
◦ Cut and Fit

Front 233

The Real World

Back 233

 Most companies do not do P & C

◦ Most applicants apply for a specific job

◦ If companies do, it is mostly placement

◦ Most P & C is done by the military

◦ Boeing is considering it

Front 234

PSYC3050 Exam II – Ch. 4-6

Back 234

Chapter 4: Predictors: Psychological Assessments

Front 235

I. Measuring Individual Differences

Back 235

a. Individual differences in people (Perspective 1)

a. Individual differences in people (Perspective 2)

Front 236

I. Did you know that . . .

Back 236

a. 41% of employers test job applicants in basic literacy and/or math skills

b. 34% of job applicants tested in 2000 lacked sufficient skills for the positions they sought

c. 68% of employers engage in various forms of job skill testing

d. 29% of employers use one or more forms of psychological measurement or assessment

e. 10% of employers use physical simulations of job tasks

Front 237

I. Reasons for testing

a. Some of the more commonly cited reasons for testing are:

Back 237

i. Testing leads to savings in the decision-making process

ii. The costs of making a wrong decision are high

iii. The job requires attributes that are hard to develop or change

iv. Hard-to-get information can be obtained more easily and efficiently

v. Individuals are treated consistently

vi. There are a lot of applicants

Front 238

I. What is a “Test”?

Back 238

a. Standardized sample of behavior
b. What is measured
c. Conditions of measurement
d. Interpretation of responses

Front 239

I. Terms and concepts

What sort of tests?

Back 239

a. Speeded Tests
b. Power Tests
c. Individual v. Group Tests
d. Paper-and-pencil
e. Computer Adaptive (Based) Testing

Front 240

I. Ethical Standards in Testing

Back 240

a. APA code of professional ethics

b. Test user qualifications

c. Invasion of privacy – reveal more information than necessary

d. Confidentiality – who should have access

e. Retention of records

Front 241

I. Sources of Information about Testing

Back 241

a. Mental Measurements Yearbook (MMY)

b. Tests in Print VII

Front 242

a. are standardized measures of characteristics, skills, abilities, etc.

Back 242

i. Tests

Front 243

are measures that are used to make predictions

Back 243

i. Predictors

Front 244

can potentially be used to make predictions

Back 244

1. Any measure (test/interview)

Front 245

Actual criterion versus

Back 245

1. conceptual criterion

Front 246

Good prediction requires

Back 246

a. good measurement!

Front 247

Distinction between tests and testing

Back 247

i. Tests: measurement instruments
ii. Testing: use of measurements to make decisions

Front 248

a. A four standard approach to evaluating personnel selection methods:

Back 248

i. Validity & Reliability
ii. Fairness
iii. Applicability / Practicality
iv. Cost

Front 249

I. Psychometric Criteria for Tests: Reliability

Back 249

a. Consistency of measurement:

i. Occasions
ii. Samples of items
iii. Items within a test
iv. Within/between test scorers

Front 250

I. Estimating Reliability: quick review

Back 250

a. Test-retest estimates
b. Parallel forms estimates
c. Internal consistency estimates
d. Inter-rater reliability

Front 251

I. Psychometric Criteria for Tests: Validity

Back 251

a. Attaching meaning to test scores
b. Appropriateness of inferences drawn from tests scores

Front 252

a. Common kinds of inferential problems

Back 252

i. Content
ii. Construct

1. Versus Face Validity

iii. Criterion

Front 253

I. Criterion-related validity designs

Back 253

i. Concurrent designs
ii. Predictive designs
iii. Incremental designs

Front 254

Problems with implementing

Back 254

a. criterion-related designs

Front 255

I. Specific Tests & Assessments

Back 255

I. Specific Tests & Assessments

Front 256

I. Intelligence Tests / Cognitive ability measures

Back 256

a. Cab be Paper-and-pencil or Computer based (CBT or CAT)

i. Almost always individualized assessment measures

Front 257

a. These tests may be categorized as:

Back 257

i. General Intelligence Tests

i. Aptitude Tests

Front 258

i. Aptitude Tests

Back 258

1. Mechanical Aptitude
2. Clerical Aptitude
3. Spatial Aptitude

Front 259

I. Sample Cognitive Ability Content

Back 259

a. Verbal Comprehension
b. Numerical Ability
c. Visual Speed And Accuracy
d. Space Visualization
e. Numerical Reasoning
f. Word Fluency
g. Symbolic Reasoning
h. Numerical reasoning: number sequence one.. 2, 4, 6.. What comes next? Etc.
i. Word fluency: list as many words in a set amount of time…in movie, John Travolta names animals in alphabetical order in 60 seconds
j. Symbolic reasoning: instead of number sequence, figure what comes up in picture sequence

Front 260

(pictorial, spatial room and strong pliers)

Back 260

Mechanical Aptitude Tests: Bennett-Mechanical Test

Front 261

a. Which pairs of items are identical?
i. 2033220638 – 2033220638

Back 261

I. Sensory/Motor Ability Tests

Front 262

I. Intelligence Tests / Cognitive ability measures

a. Advantages

Back 262

i. Reliability and Validity
ii. Administration
iii. Costs

Front 263

I. Intelligence Tests / Cognitive ability measures

a. Disadvantages

Back 263

i. Fairness

Front 264

III. Intelligence Tests / Cognitive ability measures

Back 264

a. Reliable and valid – smart now will be smart later on. Cannot be faked, not so much a good guesser.

b. Can be mass administered

c. Costly to develop, but once developed, very cost-effective.

d. Fairness: unfair/biased discrimination. Minorities, historically, have done badly on these tests b/c they are not culturally in tuned to the questions asked – developed by white males back then. Before, on a test, asked what a tractor was. For a minority who has never seen it, it would be a wrong answer. Difference in exposure to information among Minority groups

Front 265

I. Work Samples

a. Work Sample Tests:

Back 265

i. Based on the premise that the best predictor of future behavior is observed behavior under similar situations

Front 266

I. Work Samples

a. Advantages

Back 266

i. Reliability and Validity high reliability
ii. Fairness

Front 267

I. Work Samples

a. Disadvantages

Back 267

i. Costly to administer
ii. Administration issues

a. -very costly to administer the more involved they are. If it takes a machine off the line, that machine can’t be used to produce things. Applicants sometimes don’t know how to use machine and may break it – while its being repaired, it loses money
b. -useful for “can you do this job right now” but not be able to assess if the employee will be able to adapt with the job

Front 268

Work sample: you work at a hamburger place,

Back 268

a. can you flip a burger, etc.

Front 269

if you know it now, you will later. Welding – you can do it now, you can do it later for the job.

Back 269

a. Reliable –

Front 270

very valid for straight-forward, simply jobs. But for a professor, one small piece of work sample is to lecture in front of class. More complex the job, the less valid something is*****

Back 270

a. Validity –

Front 271

very little discrimination to minority groups.

Back 271

a. Fairness –

Front 272

I. Work Samples serves as

Back 272

a. Serves at realistic job preview.

Front 273

I. Types of Work Sample Tests

Back 273

a. In-Basket Exercises
b. Role-Plays

Front 274

a. sit someone at desk, sit them down in front of two baskets. The in-basket and out-basket. The job of the applicant is to go into inbox to deal and sort. Get through as much of activities as effectively as possible.

Back 274

In-basket:

Front 275

evaluated on situation.

Back 275

Role-plays:

Front 276

I. Psychomotor Ability Tests

Back 276

i. Dexterity (finger, manual)

ii. Control precision

iii. Multilimb coordination

iv. Response control

v. Reaction time

vi. Arm-hand steadiness

vii. Wrist-finger speed

viii. Speed-of-limb movement

ix. Manual production jobs may have interest in this.

x. Dexterity –

xi. Control precision – like the operation game

xii. Multi-limb coordination – can you balance and walk – physically demanding job

Front 277

a. Used for jobs with high physical demands

Back 277

I. Physical Ability

Front 278

I. Physical Ability

a. Three Issues

Back 278

i. Job relatedness
ii. Passing scores
iii. When the ability must be present

Front 279

I. Physical Ability

a. Two common ways to measure

Back 279

i. Simulations
ii. Physical agility tests

Front 280

I. Physical Ability

I. Measures of physical & psychomotor skills

a. Advantages

Back 280

i. individuals who are physically unable to perform the job

ii. can result in decreased costs / decreased absenteeism

Front 281

I. Measures of physical & psychomotor skills

a. Disadvantages

Back 281

i. Cost
ii. Validity
iii. Fairness

Front 282

I. Personality Inventories

is a collection of traits that persist across time and situations and differentiate one person from another

Back 282

a. Personality

Front 283

I. Personality Inventories

In these types of assessments there is

Back 283

a. no ‘right v. wrong’ answers

Front 284

I. Personality Inventories

a. Scale scores to predict job success

Back 284

i. Type –Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

ii. 16 Types relating to job-role preferences

Front 285

no right/wrong answer – try to create

Back 285

a. personality profile

Front 286

i. Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to experience, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness
ii. Modest validity coefficients (.20) but have incremental validity
iii. Problem of social desirability

Back 286

a. Five-factor model personality (Big “5” Theory)

Front 287

a. What does it look like:

Back 287

i. Big 5

a. Big 5 not systematically related. Somewhat sufficient in predicting job behavior.

Front 288

I. Personality inventories
a. Advantages

Back 288

i. More information
ii. Fairness
iii. Cost

Front 289

I. Personality inventories
a. Disadvantages

Back 289

i. Measurement issues
ii. Experience not Personality
iii. Social Desirability
iv. Diversity
v. Applicability

Front 290

can change temporarily introvertedness to fulfill job requirements etc.

Back 290

****Experience, not personality

Front 291

people lie to get someone to like them

Back 291

Social desirability

Front 292

do we have diversity in skin color, age, etc?

Back 292

Diversity – surface level

Front 293

a. in types of people in company, if using job assessment, may reduce diversity since you may get all extroverted people.

Back 293

Diversity – deep level

Front 294

a. Estimate the probability that applicants will steal money or merchandise
i. Used mostly in retail, but gaining acceptance for other occupations

Back 294

I. Integrity tests

Front 295

a. Types of Integrity Tests

Back 295

i. Overt integrity
ii. Personality-oriented

Front 296

I. Overt Integrity Tests

a. Research has shown that the “typical” employee-thief:

Back 296

i. Is more tempted to steal

ii. Engages in many of the common rationalizations for theft

iii. Would punish thieves less

iv. Often thinks about theft related activities

v. Attributes more theft to others

vi. Shows more inter-thief loyalty

vii. Is more vulnerable to peer pressure to steal than an honest employee

Front 297

I. Personality-Based Integrity Measures

Back 297

a. Employee theft is just one element in a larger syndrome of antisocial behavior of organizational delinquency

b. Therefore, overt integrity tests overlook a number of other counterproductive behaviors that are costly to the organization

Front 298

I. Other Behaviors Integrity Tests Can Predict

Back 298

a. Drug and alcohol abuse

b. Vandalism

c. Sabotage

d. Assault behaviors

e. Insubordination

f. Absenteeism

g. Excessive grievances

h. Bogus workers compensation claims

i. Violence

Front 299

I. Evaluation of Integrity Tests

a. Advantages

Back 299

i. Good validity (ρ = .34)
ii. Inexpensive to use
iii. Easy to administer
iv. Little to no racial adverse impact

Front 300

I. Evaluation of Integrity Tests

a. Disadvantages

Back 300

i. Males have a higher fail rate than females
ii. Younger people have a higher fail rate than older people
iii. Failure has a negative psychological impact on applicants.

Front 301

The most common selection instrument

Back 301

I. Interviews:

Front 302

a. Bad interview Questions

Back 302

i. Where do you see yourself in five years?
ii. What are your weaknesses?
iii. What in particular interested you about our company?
iv. What would your past managers say about you?
v. What is the airspeed of an unladen swallow?

Front 303

a. Prohibited Interview Questions

Back 303

i. Age
ii. Maritial status / kids
iii. Religion
iv. Political affiliation
v. Medical history
vi. Personal habits

Front 304

I. Structured Interviews

Back 304

a. Are Valid
b. Reduce the Chance of a Legal Challenge
c. Are Cost Effective

Front 305

a. Are Valid

Back 305

i. Based on a job analysis (content validity)
ii. Predict work-related behavior (criterion validity)

Front 306

a. Reduce the Chance of a Legal Challenge

Back 306

i. Face valid
ii. Don’t invade privacy
iii. Don’t intentionally discriminate
iv. Minimize adverse impact

Front 307

a. Are Cost Effective

Back 307

i. Cost to purchase/create, Cost to administer, Cost to score

Front 308

I. Structured Behavioral Interview Examples

Back 308

a. Describe the most creative work-related project you have completed.

b. Give me an example of a problem you faced on the job, and tell me how you solved it.

c. Give me an example of when you had to show good leadership.

d. Give me an example of an important goal you had to set and tell me about your progress in reaching that goal.

e. Tell me about a situation in the past year in which you had to deal with a very upset customer or co-worker.

Front 309

I. Responding well to these types of questions

Back 309

a. The "S.T.A.R." technique – Describe:

b. Be specific

c. Don't describe how you would behave

d. If you later decided you should have behaved differently, explain : i. The employer will see that you learned something from experience

Front 310

a. The "S.T.A.R." technique – Describe:

Back 310

i. the Situation and/or the Task you needed to accomplish
ii. the Action you took
iii. the Results

Front 311

I. Evaulating Interview Answer

Back 311

a. Low – medium – high

Front 312

I. Unstructured Interviews

a. They are:

Back 312

i. Unreliable
ii. Not valid
iii. Legally problematic

Front 313

I. Unstructured Interviews

a. Because they:

Back 313

i. Are not job related

ii. Rely on intuition, “amateur psychology,” and talk show methods

iii. Suffer from common rating problems

Front 314

i. Suffer from common rating problems

Back 314

1. Primacy, Contrast, Similarity, Range restriction (e.g., leniency, strictness, central tendency)

2. Every applicant gets different set of questions – unreliable, can’t compare applicants.

Front 315

I. Interview

a. Advantages

Back 315

i. Very helpful in interviewing managers

ii. Criterion related validity = .39

iii. Most commonly used method of selection

iv. Validity hard to demonstrate yet “illusion of validity” is common bias

v. Serves other personnel functions, e.g. degree of fit

Front 316

I. Interview

a. Disadvantages

Back 316

i. Reliability and Validity
ii. Fairness
iii. Cost

Front 317

a. A selection method that considers an applicant’s life, school, military, community, and work experience

Back 317

I. Biographical Information

a. Often recorded on application blank

Front 318

I. Biographical Information

a. Usefulness:

Back 318

i. Can predict as high as .30-.40 range

ii. Reveals consistent patterns of behavior

iii. Often locates unique criterion variance

Front 319

I. Example of Biodata Items

Back 319

a. Member of high school student government?
i. Yes No

b. Number of jobs in past 5 years?
i. 1 2 3-5 More than 5

c. Transportation to work:
i. Walk Bus Bike Own Car Other

Front 320

I. Biographical Information

a. Strengths

Back 320

i. Good validity (r = .36)
ii. Can predict for variety of criterion measures
iii. Easy to administer
iv. Fairly valid
v. Can have good face validity***

Front 321

I. Biographical Information

a. Weaknesses

Back 321

i. Low face validity***
ii. can invade privacy (Items can be offensive)
iii. Can be expensive to develop
iv. Not always practical to develop

Front 322

I. Assessment center

a. Standardized evaluation with multiple evaluations

Back 322

i. job-related simulations,
ii. interviews,
iii. and/or psychological tests

Front 323

I. Assessment center

a. Traditional Activities

Back 323

i. Leaderless Group Discussion
1. Problems with this technique

ii. Role Playing
1. Problems with this technique

Front 324

I. Assessment Centers

a. Four Characteristics

Back 324

i. 1.Managers – selection, promotion, training

ii. 2.Assessed in groups against performance of other groups

iii. 3.Assessor teams as raters

iv. 4.Variety of group exercises and inventories over 1-3 days

Front 325

I. Assessment Centers

a. Effectiveness

a. Criterion Contamination (Validity found is due to shared stereotypes)

Back 325

i. Actual
ii. Subtle
iii. Self-fulfilling prophecy
iv. Performance consistency
v. Managerial Situational Exercises

Front 326

a. Commonly used and least valid
b. Restricted range
c. Only useful if negative

Back 326

Letters of Recommendation

Front 327

I. Drug Testing
a. Substance abuse is major global problem

a. Two types of assessments

Back 327

i. Screening test
ii. Confirmation test

Front 328

a. Problems of reliability and validity

a. Practical issues

Back 328

i. Cost savings
ii. Issues of uniform drug testing
iii. Some issues outside the scope of I/O Psychology

Front 329

I. Drug Testing

Random facts

Back 329

a. Use in 2001
b. 80% of U.S. organizations tested for drugs
c. 16% of employees admit to using drugs
d. Drug users are more likely to
e. Miss work, Use health care benefits, Be fired, Have an accident
f. Initial screening of hair or urine
g. Cheaper method ($30 for urine, $50 for hair sample)
h. Enzyme Multiplied Immunoassay Technique (EMIT)
i. Radioimmunoassay (RIA)
j. Confirmation test
k. Typically used only after a positive initial screening
l. Thin layer chromatography/mass spectrometry
m. More expensive
n. Responses to the Presence of Drugs
o. 98% of job offers withdrawn
p. Current employees who test positive
q. 25% are fired after a positive test
r. 66% are referred to counseling and treatment
s. -----
t. No poppy seeds/yogurt
u. -yogurt makes breath smell like alcohol
v. -diet influences results of test
w. -false positives/negatives as a result of prescription drugs/detox
x. -drug testing very expensive to do

Front 330

I. The Value of Testing

a. Trends:

Back 330

i. Tyranny of testing
ii. Some tests are useful in predicting job performance, some are not
iii. As a class, moderately predictive, but could be due to poor criteria

Front 331

I. The Value of Testing

a. New Test Methods:

Back 331

i. Situational judgment test
ii. Online computer testing emerges

Front 332

I. Multiple Predictors

Back 332

a. It’s not usually a question of which predictor to choose -- it is more often a question of which predictorS to choose or which predictor to ADD

Front 333

a. Multiple predictors should provide:

Back 333

i. RELEVANT information (validity of X)
ii. UNIQUE information (validity of X1 + X2)

Front 334

PSYC3050 Exam II – Ch. 4-6

Back 334

Chapter 5: Personnel Decisions

Front 335

• Personnel Selection occurs in a larger context

o Personnel Decisions in the New Millennium- changes

Back 335

Speed of technological change- computers

Use of teams to accomplish work

Changes in communication technology- cell phones


Most large corporations are now global in nature

Service orientation

Front 336

 Speed of technological change- computers

Back 336

• Trash collectors now have computers-find traffic jams

Front 337

 Use of teams to accomplish work

Back 337

more teamwork

Front 338

Changes in communication technology

Back 338

cell phones

Front 339

 Most large corporations are now global in nature

Back 339

• Employees everywhere- more diversified, more challenges

Front 340

 Service orientation

Back 340

• Phones, burgers, cash register

Front 341

• Testing: Making selection decisions

o Outcomes

Back 341

Usually 2 outcomes- pass/ fail- accept/ reject

Front 342

Testing: Making selection decisions

o Quality of outcomes

Back 342

How good are we at telling people they passed- do they have knowledge they are demonstrating

Front 343

Testing: Making selection decisions

o Features of testing that affect outcomes and quality of outcomes

Back 343

 Cutoffs

 Selection ratios

 Standards for success and base rates

 Psychometric quality of measurement instruments

 Graph- predictive of performance of job – Decision Outcome Analysis HW#2

Front 344

 Cutoffs

Back 344

• Hated in US, embraced- represent a standard of performance
• Objective way to categorize who you are testing
• If pass- acceptable- if fail- rejected
• Set to high- get over qualified
• Set to low- get under qualified
• More complex job- higher cut off will be

Front 345

 Selection ratios

Back 345

• Numeric index ratio- from 0-1—represents selectivity of hiring going on- # of people who will be hired/ # of people applying- hiring 1 person/100-.01 selection ratio—99/100- high selection ratio- .1 selective group, .9 unselective group

Front 346

 Standards for success and base rates

Back 346

• Standards of success

o Minimal level of performance to define someone as good or successful worker- in academics-D-pass

o Sales- 3 sales in week- considered acceptable

o Criterion for acceptable performance

Front 347

 Standards for success and base rates

Back 347

• Base rates

o Minimal level of performance to define someone as good or successful worker- in academics-D-pass

o Sales- 3 sales in week- considered acceptable

o Criterion for acceptable performance

o People you currently have in organization

o # of people in organization classified as being acceptable- # of students at LSU who have at least D average or higher

o Want higher base rate- more successful it will be

Front 348

 Psychometric quality of measurement instruments

STUDY SLIDE!!!

Back 348

• If you have a bad measure, cannot set effective cutoff score- base rate goes down

• ****SLIDE

• Cutoffs – passing score – minimum to get that “yes” anything below is a “no”

• -higher cutoff score = fewer people considered

• Selection ratios – range from 0-1. reflects selectivity of your hiring. 0.1 is more selective than 0.9

• Standards for success – standard of graduate lsu is 2.5 gpa. Base rates – want it to be as high as possible, want as many people as possible in companies to be as qualified as possible.

Front 349

 Graph- predictive of performance of job – Decision Outcome Analysis HW#2

Back 349

• Y axis is performance
• X axis- selection
• Cut score- vertical line
• Reliability-.81
• Validity-.63- measuring what it should- higher #, the more closer blue circle will be

Front 350

o Individuals who are selected should be hired- test says are good and 6 months later are good- right of cut off scores and above criterion

Back 350

• True positives- correctly identify

Front 351

o People you are correctly identifying- who you say are crappy and do crappy on job

Back 351

• True negatives

Front 352

o People who are incorrectly rejected but would do well on job- did not get cut off score

Back 352

• False negative

Front 353

o People you accept but shouldn’t have- pass test and do crappy

Back 353

• False positive

• Want A and C bigger- more- want more people correctly accepted or rejected and less incorrectly identified

• If you have a racially or gender discriminatory test- likely to fall in B and D- incorrectly identified

Front 354

• Evaluation of testing

o Decision utility of testing systems

Back 354

 Improving on the base rate
• Brining better people into organization- want it as high as possible- never will be 1

 Focus on hires vs. all candidates- utility- effects how good you say system is- most people just look at hires

Front 355

o Cost effectiveness of testing systems (utility)

 Benefits of correct outcomes

Back 355

• Have higher base rate- better employees- more money- bottom dollar
• Social aspects can approve- still want diversity

Front 356

 Costs of incorrect outcomes

Back 356

• High turnover

o Bad employees more likely to turnover- spend more money to replace them

o Can cause good employees to leave- upset with bad employees

Front 357

 Costs of testing procedures

Back 357

• Time- taking people off line

• If company has bad rep- good employees might not apply- legal issues- face validity or discriminatory issues

Front 358

 Cost tradeoffs of selection vs. other approaches
to staffing

Back 358

• Do not have to use standard of selection

• Nepotism- hiring only people you know

o You know them and will know how you will work with them- social pressures they will do well- not let down person

o Become social loafers, may not be qualified to be job

---

• Head hunting- go out and poach best people from other organizations

o In theory best person- comp A vs. comp B- quality theory in perspective

o Difficult to get people to leave- if they leave question of loyalty

o Very Expensive- pay head hunter ect And return may not be worth it

Front 359

 Look at graphs- slides 6 and 7!!!!!

Back 359

• Sit 1 – not worried about ppl who didn’t pass test; lots of people in due to high pass rate

• Sit 2 – (increased cutoff score from sit 1) – more selective – of people hired, more hired on in true positives.

• Sit 3 – pass rate of 20%, very high cutoff – actual people hired, very good decision. 8 out of 20 brought in are really good, 2 are bad..etc. unlike sit 1 where 5 are good and 5 are bad.

• Only one way to think about it

• Higher the passing score/cutoff score – more likely to bring in good people

• **** general rule of pass rate – cause/effect situations

Front 360

• Multiple Hurdle Approach- approach to selection- have multiple tools for selection- test until fail a test

Back 360

o Each predictor evaluated independently of the others

o Each predictor has a cutoff score- assessment, interview, ect

o Applicants pass if they exceed the cutoff scores for each predictor

Front 361

 Predictors (tests) are hurdles

Back 361

o Each predictor evaluated independently of the others

Front 362

 A cutoff score is a minimally acceptable score on a predictor

Back 362

o Each predictor has a cutoff score- assessment, interview, ect

Front 363

 Set of people meet minimum of all- slide 9

Back 363

o Applicants pass if they exceed the cutoff scores for each predictor

Front 364

• Regression Approach- slide 11- way of selecting people

o Regression,

Back 364

 A statistical procedure, allows us to forecast a criterion from a predictor

• Everyone gets all assessments- way of predicting future performance

 Very similar to the correlation

Front 365

• What if we have more than 1 predictor

Back 365

o Multiple Regression- many predictors- take all tests- slide 13 and 14

Front 366

• The correlation between criterion and two or more predictors

• Tells degree of relationship between your assessment and performance- want it to be big as possible

• Ranges from 0 to 1- want closer to 1

• Who should you hire

Back 366

 R

Front 367

 The size of R is dependent on

Back 367

• Relation of each predictor to the criterion

o How each predictor is related to criterion- how is Interview and contientiousness related to job performace

• Relations between the predictors

o How is interview related to contientousness

Front 368

 R2 is the square of the multiple correlation

SLIDe!!!!!

Back 368

• This value indicates the amount of variance in the criterion accounted for by the predictors

• How much job performance you are accounting for

• Bigger R2 more variance you are accounting for- want to account for more variance- 30% confidence person will do well on job- want it to be as high as possible- good predictors

• Predictors overlap each other- if you are a poor test taker, how you come across in Interview might be nervous about test- error

Front 369

 correlation between criterion and two or more predictors
 Want to be closer to 1 – the bigger, the better the correlation
 Size of correlation depended on
 -more related
 - R = correlation/relationship of predictors
 -relations between predictors – the more related the predictors are to one another, the lower the R is going to be. Not added something new to understanding. Than in different situation with 3 diff predictors
 -ex: 2 predictors (unrelated) –
 -ex: 2 “ (related) – tapping into same thing
 R = 0.8; high number, predictor very related. R-squared = 0.64 --- represents percentage; 64% of understood criterion based on predictors.

Back 369

 correlation between criterion and two or more predictors
 Want to be closer to 1 – the bigger, the better the correlation
 Size of correlation depended on
 -more related
 - R = correlation/relationship of predictors
 -relations between predictors – the more related the predictors are to one another, the lower the R is going to be. Not added something new to understanding. Than in different situation with 3 diff predictors
 -ex: 2 predictors (unrelated) –
 -ex: 2 “ (related) – tapping into same thing
 R = 0.8; high number, predictor very related. R-squared = 0.64 --- represents percentage; 64% of understood criterion based on predictors.

Front 370

• Selection with Multiple Regression- slide 16

Back 370

o Develop equation- predictive or concurrent validity study----Concurrent- current employees

o Assess people

o Compute Y for all people- outcome- predicted job performance

o Hire the people with the highest Y’s

Front 371

o Outcome is a regression equation
o Y = a + b1X1 + b2X2 + …… bkXk

Back 371

o Take predictors – and use to predict outcome variable – regression – when one outcome variable is applied a predictor

o Assess, first, employees

o Then assess new batch of people – try to predict what their performance will be

o Would hire people would hire high predictive performance (Y)

o Y=predictor performance
o A=constant

Front 372

• Using multiple predictors- slide 18

Back 372

o 0.25, 0.50, 0.25 = got from regression = referred to as beta weights

o Those numbers – the bigger they are, the more important that test is in predicting performance

Front 373

 If you do bad on 1 but really well somewhere else, you could still come out just find
 Can also take regression and make it non compensatory

Back 373

o Compensatory models

Front 374

 Set a minimum level for performance on any of the levels- if don’t make the minimum then don’t look at them
 Compensate some but min level on all predictors

Back 374

o Non-compensatory models

Front 375

 Multiple hurdle- another name

Back 375

o Sequential strategies

Front 376

 Don’t like in I/O- manager interviews a bunch of people and decides who they like- not fair

Back 376

o Clinical decision making

Front 377

o Combine information about different skills and
set a minimum combined score
o -you do good in one, but bad in another, can help you out – even out.

Back 377

o Compensatory models

Front 378

o Multiple cutoffs set minimum “passing” scores
for each test/predictor

Back 378

o Noncompensatory models

Front 379

o Decisions are made in “steps”: Make decisions about some candidates after each test

Back 379

o Sequential strategies

Front 380

o Decisions are made on the basis of decision makers’ best judgment (judges combine “cues” to arrive at a decision)

Back 380

o Clinical decision making

Front 381

o What is band width a function of?

Back 381

 Banding argues the difference between the 1st and 5th person may not be all that different (usually we work top down)

 Create bands – 5 people with similar scores- and then use other criterion

 The more narrow your band- function of how precise are you measuring things- how good- you can argue the score of the top person is very different from the 6th person

 With a less precise measure (interview) bands will be larger

 In banding, want as narrow band as possible- want to know that group is distinct from another

Front 382

• What is banding

Back 382

o Banding and selection ratio

o Types of banding- read!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! in test

o Validity generalization – if its valid for one group, should be valid for other group somewhere else – also known as validity generalization. The more different things are, the less likely to have it.

Front 383

• Uniform Guidelines (on Employee Selection Procedures)- slides 22 and 23

Back 383

o A template for doing selection legally

 The “Bible” of I psychs
 Tells you about best practices, how many people you need in a validity study
 Put out by Fed government but I pyschs have large hand

Front 384

o Two legal bases for discrimination-Discrimination depends if bad or good- testing is always discriminating

Back 384

 Adverse impact

 Disparate impact

--- Protected group

Front 385

• A type of unfair discrimination in which the results of using a particular personnel selection method has an adverse impact or differential effect for a protected group vs the majority

Back 385

 Adverse impact

• Gender, age, religious, sexual orientation- you are being unfairly treated to majority group

Front 386

• Adverse impact occurs when- how do when know when it occurs- 4/5ths rule-80%

o (# Protected class Hired/ # Protected class Applied)/ (# Non-protected class Hired/ # Non-protected class applied)

 If # < .80—you have adverse impact

 Other ways to assess adverse impact

• Chi-Square analysis- more analytical

• Regression analysis- more analytical

• Fed government puts more emphasis on 4/5ths

Back 386

o In other words, you hire a larger percentage of non-protected class employees- minority group hired less than majority group- something bad with selection system- but not always a bad thing

Front 387

• Type of unfair treatments in which protected group are given different procedures in their consideration for employment

• Need cut score of 50, women don’t do as well- give cut score of 45

Back 387

 Disparate impact

Front 388

• Indentified by race (whites vs. everyone else), gender (men are majority although in pop minority), national origin, color (white vs everyone else), religion (Chrisianity), age (under 40-majority vs over 40), disability

Back 388

 Protected group

Front 389

document for how to design/conduct selection from legally sound basis.

Back 389

Uniform guidelines

Front 390

usually heard along with discrimination in hiring practices – unfair/biased discrimination of demographics (care about more)

Back 390

 Adverse impact –

Front 391

minorities (better referred to as protected classes – race, gender, national origin, color, religion, age, and disability) provided differential treatment – process different for them. Ex: men have one interview, women have five interviews.

Back 391

 Disparate impact –

Front 392

• Adverse Impact- Common methods- is there usually adverse impact

Back 392

o Cognitive abilities- yes
 See most adverse impact
 Typically against minorities- African Americans

o Physical abilities- yes
 Women and elders are most discriminated

o Spatial abilities- yes
 Women are better than men

o Personality- typically no

o Assessment Centers- depends on how well its done- typically not

o Interviews- depends on how good, structured, how conducted

o What if we find adverse impact?
 The organization is obligated to use another method OR validate the method- if they can show cognitive abilities test is highly predictive of job performance- even if has adverse impact- they can use it

• Implication: No validation necessary if no adverse impact

• Implication: Adverse impact is okay if the measure is valid

o 4/5th rule, 80% rule, all function of adverse impact.

o (protected hire/protected applied) / (non-protected hired/non-protected applied) must be less than 80% to be adverse (0.79 = adverse, 0.81 = non)

o Spatial –(generally) against women

o Personality – against none – consistent across all groups

o Assessment centers – against none

o Interviews – against none

o You can use discriminating test if you show that it is job related; if it shows job performance – can still use it. Sociological implications – can have an organization without women if validated to have better use for skills of men – men scoring higher. Economic impact – if you find out company is discriminating, morally, you won’t want to shop there.

o If there is no adverse impact, no need to validate. But you need to validate to know if you have adverse impact. In guidelines, said you should validate every 2-3 years, practice – maybe 5.

Front 393

• Civil Rights Act of 1964

Back 393

o “It is unlawful to fail to hire or otherwise discriminate against an individual because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, national origin OR

 To limit, segregate, or classify employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive any individual of employment opportunities because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, national origin”

Front 394

o Exceptions: BFOQ- Boneified occupational Qualification- hooters- you have to be of this religion, gender to do this job

Back 394

 Seniority- you can give promotions to more senior persons even if younger is more qualified

 Testing- if you can show they cant do ability of job, you don’t have to hire them- women are unable to do physical labor- construction worker

Front 395

EXAMPLES

Back 395

o Gender/sex was only stuck in act to make it FAIL. Was not there originally.
o Exemptions – BFOQ (bonified occupational qualifications) (chinese restaurant can hire only chinese if they can argue – or entertainment, for a movie part – white female, criteria to do job, or being a certain religion to be a preacher..etc). Seniority – selected to be retained (first in, first out policy) – white males at higher rungs – first in, testing – can hire men above women if show test is job related.
o Hooters attempted to argue being female was job requirement. Lost case – don’t need to be female to serve food.

Front 396

• Civil Rights Act of 1964- Title VII

Back 396

o Addressed all personnel functions
o Applies to all organizations with 15+ employees, except
o Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC)- deals with laws

Front 397

o Applies to all organizations with 15+ employees, except

Back 397

 Private clubs- Boy scouts
 Employment places connected with Indian Reservations
 Religious Organizations- separation of church and state

Front 398

o Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC)- deals with laws

Back 398

 Investigates allegations of discrimination
 Issues regulations regarding compliance with Title VII
 Gathers employment information

Front 399

• Guidelines for Employee Testing Procedures

Back 399

o 1964 -- CRA established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

 Power they have depends on President of that time- if Liberal in office- tend to have more power and see more citations

o 1966 -- EEOC created Guidelines for Employee Testing Procedures

o 1972 -- CRA created Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinating Council- EEOC had no regulatory power until now

o 1978 -- Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures-“The Bible”

 Systematic record keeping of employment decisions
 Adverse impact and four-fifths or 80% rule

Front 400

• Civil Rights Act of 1991

Back 400

o Disparate impact is codified and written into law for the first time- banding became serious issue

o Shifted burden of proof back to employer; once disparate impact is shown employer must show job relatedness of selection practices

 Before then all up to employee- not more responsibility of organization

o Allowed (a) limited punitive damages and (b) jury trials to award damages

Front 401

• Specific Supreme Court Cases

Back 401

• Specific Supreme Court Cases

Front 402

 Burdon of proof on the defendant – “Griggs Burdon”- Griggs had to show proof that Duke Power were doing bad things

Back 402

o Griggs vs. Duke Power Company (1971)

Front 403

 Organizations must use rigorous validation procedures- high school diploma and janitorial work

Back 403

o Albermarle Paper Co. vs. Moody (1975)

Front 404

 Holding positions for certain classes is illegal

Back 404

o Bakke vs. Regents of the University of California (1978)

Front 405

 Decisions cannot be made on the basis of stereotypes – whether they “fit the job”

Back 405

o Price Waterhouse vs. Hopkins (1989)

Front 406

o Protects people over age of 40 from discrimination on the basis of age
o Age can be qualification if it is a BFOQ

Back 406

• Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967

Front 407

o Employment protection for individuals with disabilities (physical or mental impairment that substantially limits life activities) who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the position
o Disabilities now one of big 5

Back 407

• Americans with Disabilities Act (1990)- Important

Front 408

• Fairness Issues in Testing

Back 408

o Meeting dual goals
 High performance
 Diversity- don’t want same type of person over and over

o Adverse impact, validity, and alternative predictors- social image thing

o ADA: Standardization vs. Accommodation
 Have to make accommodation- reasonable- not going to make it an unstandardized

o Emphasizing other staffing strategies

o Applicant reactions

o *reasonable accommodations – most are about $2 (required for person with disability) – some are extremely expensive (elevator)

o Expensive to renovate old building to be accessible – but all new buildings must have.

o Restructuring – redesigning work flow for person

Front 409

• Recap - Civil Rights Act - Title VII

Back 409

o Who is Covered
o ◦Private employers with at least 15 employees
o ◦Federal, state, and local governments
o ◦Employment agencies
o ◦Unions
o ◦Americans working abroad for American companies
o }Who is Exempt
o ◦Bona fide tax exempt private clubs
o ◦Indian tribes
o ◦Individuals denied employment due to national security concerns
o ◦Publicly elected officials and their personal staff

Front 410

Chapter 6: Organizational Learning

Back 410

Chapter 6: Organizational Learning

Front 411

• Trends in Organizational Learning

Back 411

o Greater emphasis on skill enhancement
o Learning has ascended- role and power have increased
o Training is an important part of an organization’s long-range, long-term strategy:

Front 412

o Greater emphasis on skill enhancement

Back 412

 Keep worker in organization-life long learning- stay interested and in organization

Front 413

o Learning has ascended- role and power have increased

Back 413

 Learning – encode, retain and use information- why it is becoming more important'
 Adapt to changing work world
• More automative and technologically based

Front 414

o Training is an important part of an organization’s long-range, long-term strategy:

Back 414

 Organizations are becoming flatter- cutting out middle management- workload is increasing

 Life-long learning perspectives- workers seen as people- challenge- empowering employees to be better

 More global and diverse work force- diversity training big right now

Front 415

• Training-A few statistics…

Back 415

o }$58 Billion spent on training in U.S. Organizations
o ◦$1200 per learner
o }Costs need to consider
o ◦Direct costs
o ◦Indirect costs
o ◦Hidden costs
o }Types of formal training:
o ◦Classroom-65%
o ◦E-learning-20%

Front 416

• Process by which change in knowledge or skills is acquired through education or experience

Back 416

• What is learning?

Front 417

o Relatively permanent change in a specific behavior of the individual due to an experience

Back 417

• Cognitive aspect but also behavioral component

Front 418

• Three phases of skill acquisition:

Back 418

o Declarative knowledge
o Knowledge compilation
o Procedural knowledge

Front 419

• *******on test – phases

Back 419

• Declarative – learning about facts and other things
• Knowledge
• Procedural – no longer notice; so used to doing it, no longer think about it

Front 420

o “Planned effort by a company to facilitate employee’s learning of job related competencies.” (Noe, 1999)•

Back 420

What is Training?******

Front 421

• knowledge, skills abilities and behaviors (KSAs)
• attitudinal change and self-awareness

Back 421

 Competencies include

Front 422

• trainees develop intellectual capital
• supports philosophy of continuous learning

Back 422

 Competencies need to be transferred to the job

Front 423

o Three phases of skill acquisition:

• Facts, very basics- mixing yellow and blue together makes green

Back 423

 Declarative knowledge

Front 424

o Three phases of skill acquisition:

• Integration of sequences- first I do 1, then 2, then I can move on to 3- taking facts and putting them into logical sequence

Back 424

 Knowledge compilation

Front 425

o Three phases of skill acquisition:

• Things become automatic- don’t have to think about what to do to get there- just do it

Back 425

 Procedural knowledge

Front 426

o Experts v. novices

 3 distinguishing features of experts!!!!!

Back 426

• Proceduralization

• Mental models

• Meta- Cognitions

Front 427

• Proceduralization

Back 427

o Experts fall into procedural knowledge- don’t think about sequence

Front 428

• Mental models

Back 428

o Experts can re-arrange things in their head and create mental models that link things together

Front 429

• Meta- Cognitions

Back 429

o High-thinking- see very big picture and do not need to focus on individual pieces

Front 430

o Individual differences in learning-3

Back 430

Trait –like attributes

Self- efficacy

Cognitive ability

Front 431

Trait –like attributes

Back 431

• Personality stuff- people who are neurotic, tend to be poor test takers- show up- trait may affect performance—moody people may affect how they train

Front 432

Self- efficacy

Back 432

• Feeling of how confident are you- do you feel you are a good learner or do you think you are about to get fired

Front 433

Cognitive ability

Back 433

• How smart you are affects your learning curve- higher cognitive ability have smoother curve
• Time you invest in things in effective

Front 434

• More on what training “is”- print slide 5

Back 434

o “Planned effort by a company to facilitate employee’s learning of job related competencies.” (Noe, 1999)

Front 435

 Competencies include

Back 435

• Knowledge, skills abilities and behaviors (KSAs)
• Attitudinal change and self-awareness

o Getting rid of sexual harassment in environment
o People like you- improvement of well-being

Front 436

 Competencies need to be transferred to the job

Back 436

• Trainees develop intellectual capital
o Can call on more diverse employees

• Supports philosophy of continuous learning
o One of best predictors of transfer is what other employees say is important

Front 437

• In other words…

Back 437

o A system of learning in a work context

o Process through which the KSA’s of employees are enhanced

o Any difference between training & development? – YES

 Negative connotation to training

• Development is exciting!

 Development is considered a longer-term venture

 Focused on broader enrichment of individual

• For future jobs

Front 438

• Training Practices

Back 438

o 70% (more) of employers provide training

o $50-$60 billion spent on training in U.S.- late 90’s, now more

o In-House vs. Outsource- organization decision- organizationally dependent

Front 439

o 70% (more) of employers provide training

Back 439

 New hire training

Front 440

o $50-$60 billion spent on training in U.S.- late 90’s, now more

Back 440

 Transportation, communications and public utilities spend the most

• A lot of money involved in learning to fly a jet

 Service, construction & retail spend the least

• Retail- doesn’t take much training- basic knowledge transfer

• Very high-turnover jobs- flexible working environment

• Skills that have to be learned are cheap to learn on

Front 441

o In-House vs. Outsource- organization decision- organizationally dependent

Back 441

 Relatively balanced across levels- individually dependent

 Executive training somewhat more likely to be outsourced

• Having skill set to train executives- want newest knowledge- hot topic in psych now

Front 442

• Classes of Training Goals

Back 442

o Socialization & orientation of new workers

o Job-specific skills training

o Remedial training

o Personal & career development classes

o Updating

o Retraining

o Training for organizational culture change

o Cross-training and team development

o Retention & organizational commitment

Front 443

 Socialization is a process of an adaptation- teaching employees of social nature of workplace
 Orientation- getting rules and procedures figured out
 Orientation is a small subset of socialization- pick up orientation quicker than socialization process

Back 443

o Socialization & orientation of new workers

Front 444

 Refresher coarse- know new and best software- employees already have necessary skills set- just make more effective

Back 444

o Remedial training

Front 445

 Stress courses

Back 445

o Personal & career development classes

Front 446

 New things have happened in job- lets learn a new skill that goes along with in
 Usually with Remedial training

Back 446

o Updating

Front 447

 Someone screwed up- retrain them- sexual harassment retraining

Back 447

o Retraining

Front 448

 Want organization to go down new path- new competencies emphasizing

Back 448

o Training for organizational culture change

Front 449

 Trained to do several things

Back 449

o Cross-training and team development

Front 450

 Big with companies with big turn-over

Back 450

o Retention & organizational commitment

Front 451

• Model of Training

o Goldstein’s 3-phase model- I down to III

Back 451

o Phase I: Needs Assessment

o Phase II: Training and Development

o Phase III: Evaluation- often forgotten phase

Front 452

o Phase I: Needs Assessment

Back 452

 Figure out what training needs to be done- if set up needs assessment correctly you will know what you need to evaluate
 Diagnosing present problems and future challenges that can be met through training and development- what to do to address issues

Front 453

• Organization Analysis

Back 453

o Where does current organization stand in larger employment world- if already defective- with future changes may be more far behind

o Does it have skills needed to be effective now and in future

o Get info from
 Interviews with managers
 Survey of larger employees
 Look at hard numbers- problems with turnovers and sexual harassment

Front 454

• Task and KSA analysis

Back 454

o Job analysis- what tasks are needed- knowledge, skills, and abilities needed

Front 455

• Person analysis

Back 455

o Self- assessment- do employees have skill- can you function in environment with sexual harassment

o Asking employees to define their training needs

o Idea to identify gaps- employees say 1 thing- others say different- need to address gap

Front 456

• Job analysis identifies

Back 456

o Tasks

o Conditions under which tasks are performed

o KSAOs needed to perform tasks under those conditions

Front 457

• Task analysis identifies how tasks are learned

Back 457

o Expected at time-of-hire
o Easily taught on-the-job
o Current training program
o No training

Front 458

 Basic needs assessment include

Back 458

• Direct observation
• Questionnaires
• Consultation with persons in key positions, and/or with specific knowledge- managers
• Review of relevant literature

o People need to be effective on these 3 things to be effective communicator

• Interviews

o Semi-structured- set of questions by depending on answer may not be rigid on path

• Focus groups

o Bring in team- people can play off one another- coalesce information to get better outcome

• Tests
• Records & report studies
• Work samples

Front 459

o Phase II: Training and Development

 Selection and Design of Instructional Programs

Back 459

• Strategies for enhancing learning & transfer

• Techniques for training: presentation (e.g., lecture, videotape), simulation (e.g., role play), OJT- on the job training- shadowing (e.g., buddy system)- food industry good example

• Dealing with individual differences (e.g., trainee abilities, background, learning style, learning pace- how fast employees learn info)

Front 460

o Phase II: Training and Development

 Training

Back 460

• Implementation issues: standardizing- if basic knowledge can be very standardized- un-standardized with complex issue with small # of employees, maximizing participation- want employees involved, enhancing transfer- making sure training is as realistic as possible- taking what they are learning and applying it to job

• Trainee issues: motivation- do employees want to be there, personal control- what managers want

Front 461

o Phase III: Evaluation- often forgotten phase

 Four levels of evaluating training effectiveness (Kirkpatrick)

Back 461

• Internal criteria:
o Reaction criteria
o Learning criteria

• External criteria:
o Behavioral criteria
o Results criteria

Front 462

• Internal criteria: reactions of trainees- how do they feel- during training

test of reaction, how you felt about the training

Back 462

o Reaction criteria

Front 463

 At end of training give test- if do bad say training was not effective

Back 463

o Learning criteria

Front 464

• External criteria: after training

 What is happening- more sexual harassment, more sales?
 On th job; do you see what is happening

Back 464

o Behavioral criteria

Front 465

 Do you see reduction in costs- is waste going down, turnover going down?
 Bottom dollar – does performance improve?

Back 465

o Results criteria

Front 466

 Use of evaluation models

Back 466

• Science vs. practice evaluation goals
o Practice- are employees happy

• Focus on measuring and explaining change
o If training person cannot justify job- will get fired- must be good at showing training was effective somehow

• Experimental and quasi-experimental designs

Front 467

• Preconditions for Learning

Back 467

o Trainee Readiness
o Trainee Motivation

Front 468

o Trainee Readiness

Back 468

 Are they ready to be trained, do they want to be trained

Front 469

o Trainee Motivation

Back 469

 Expectancy Model
 Goal Setting Behavior
 Self Efficacy
 Participation in Decision Making

Front 470

 Expectancy Model

Back 470

• Do they expect to get something out of training
• If employees expect something out of training, it will be more effective

Front 471

 Goal Setting Behavior

Back 471

• Have employees set smart goals- if employees set goals for themselves the transfer of knowledge will be more effective

Front 472

 Self Efficacy

Back 472

• How well do they feel they will do in training- effects learning

Front 473

 Participation in Decision Making

Back 473

• Do they get to decide which skills are being trained- related to idea of self determination- people who feel they have control over their life tend to do better

Front 474

• Training & Development- Learning Research*****2 questions

Back 474

o Practice and Recitation
o Distributed vs. massed practice
o Whole-task vs. Part-task
o Knowledge of Results
o Goal setting
o Positive reinforcement
o Models/ Social Learning Theory- various models
o Cooperative learning

Front 475

 Keep reading same things- eventually gets you to certain point on learning curve
 Can lead to over learning

Back 475

o Practice and Recitation

Front 476

 Distributed better- a little bit of learning over certain period of time- learning to play the piano

Back 476

o Distributed vs. massed practice

Front 477

 Whole task better for learning complex task- you need to see how everything fits together
 Learning to play baseball- part-task- don’t learn everything at once

Back 477

o Whole-task vs. Part-task

Front 478

 Important when doing training to know what expected results are- need to be stated in training session
 Need to give feedback- the more immediate, the better

Back 478

o Knowledge of Results

Front 479

 Setting goals is very important

Back 479

o Goal setting

Front 480

 Little rewards for doing something successfully- reinforcing good or positive behavior

Back 480

o Positive reinforcement

Front 481

 By curious learning – learning through others

Back 481

o Models/ Social Learning Theory- various models

Front 482

 Depending on nature of what people learning, it can be effective- learning in groups- works well in education- study groups

Back 482

o Cooperative learning

Front 483

• Transfer and Maintenance of Training

o Types of transfer-3

Back 483

 1. Positive transfer = what trainer wants

 2. Zero transfer

 3. Negative Transfer

Front 484

• What you learn in training improves performance on job

Back 484

Positive transfer = what trainer wants

Front 485

• What you learn does not effect performance- no change in behavior

Back 485

 2. Zero transfer

Front 486

• What you learned in training negatively effects performing- goes down- can be short term, but over long term may turn to positive transfer

Back 486

 3. Negative Transfer

Front 487

 Might have to do retraining- depends on how quickly skills decline
 If employees enjoy training, may want to do more

Back 487

o Maintenance of training

Front 488

• Facilitating Positive Transfer

Back 488

o Model of Identical Elements Contextual interference
 Trying to enhance positive transfer- make it as realistic as possible- use tool needed

o Variety of examples
 Different ways of thinking and seeing- more examples more positive transfers- may remember 1

o Reducing amount of feedback
 When first off training- want lots of feedback- over time, reduce so they can integrate knowledge and feel they know what they are doing- over time expect it and has no value

o Setting goals
 Want goals realistic and achievable

o Realistic expectations
 Helping employees understanding what training meant to achieve and what to expect on job

o Characteristics of work environment
 If manager doesn’t care- his way or highway

Front 489

• Training Methods- On-Site

Back 489

o Most common; 93% of companies

o Generally informal, but may be formal

o Internships, apprenticeships, job rotation, mentoring

 PRO: produce while learn; eases transfer

 CON: loss of (1) trainer time and (2) use of (& possible damage to) equipment

Front 490

• Strategic Value of Training and Development

o Four strategies companies employee to place themselves strategically in the market place

Back 490

 Speed strategy
 Innovation strategy
 Quality enhancement strategy
 Cost-reduction strategy

Front 491

• Training Methods- Off-Site

Back 491

o Lecture
o AV materials
o Computer-based training (CBT/WBT)
 Linear programs
 Branching

o Simulation

o Trainer interactive approaches
 Roundtable discussion
 Case study
 Role playing
 Behavioral modeling

Front 492

• Managerment Development Training

Back 492

o About individuals learn to perform effectively in managerial roles

 Cultural diversity training

• Melting pot vs multicultural conception

 Sexual harassment training ….

Front 493

• Group sensitivity training

Back 493

o Group interaction with little direction for the purpose of promoting self-enhancement and behavioral change
o May work better for groups meeting for more sessions & for larger groups

Front 494

• Mentoring*****

Back 494

o Mutually recognized relationship between an older (usually), more knowledgeable