Determinants, Detection and Amelioration of Adverse Impact in Personnel Selection Procedures: Issues, Evidence and Lessons Learned

By L. M. Hough, F. Oswald, Robert E. Ployhart. 2001

425 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a75fef7e520fd72696dec740a903a9bbaeeb7026

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Subgroup Differences in Situational Judgment Test Performance: A Meta-Analysis (2008, methodology): “Hough, Oswald, and Ployhart (2001) conducted a meta-analysis documenting subgroup differences in SJTs as part of their review of a variety of selection devices.”
The Team Personality–Team Performance Relationship Revisited: The Impact of Criterion Choice, Pattern of Workflow, and Method of Aggregation (2009, background): “Personality measures are frequently useful because they can contribute to selection decisions while reducing the risk of adverse impact ( Hough, Oswald, & Ployhart, 2001 ).”
A Meta-Analysis of Gender Group Differences for Measures of Job Performance in Field Studies (2012, background): “Such models would require substantial care, as a complex array of gender-related abilities might be related to job performance (e.g., spatial ability, muscular endurance, agreeableness or dependability; cf. Hough et al., 2001).”
Understanding Racial Differences on Cognitive Ability Tests in Selection Contexts: An Integration of Stereotype Threat and Applicant Reactions Research (2003, background): “…that there are sizeable racial subgroup differences on test perceptions favoring Whites (e.g., test-taking motivation, face validity, belief in tests), and that these perceptions may thus contribute to racial subgroup test differences (e.g., Hough et al., 2001; Ryan, 2001; Sackett et al., 2001).”
Stereotype Threat in Organizations: Implications for Equity and Performance (2015, background): “Given the sizeable body of research on group differences in employment testing (Hough et al. 2001), the role of stereotype threat as a contributing factor to such differences has been a subject of considerable speculation but relatively little direct empirical investigation in actual hiring…”
Psychology Meets Machine Learning: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Algorithmic Job Candidate Screening (2018, background): “, discrimination of minorities (Hough et al. 2001)) and human biases (e.”
3 Staffing Twenty‐first‐century Organizations (2008, background): “However, such measures also lead to the largest race‐based differences in test‐score means, and, consequently, differential passing rates and differential selection rates (Aguinis & Smith, 2007 ; Hough, Oswald, & Ployhart, 2001 ; Outtz, 2002 ).”
Hiring for retention and performance (2009, result): “However, we refer readers to findings by Barrick and Zimmerman (2005) in reference to the minimal adverse impact caused by the predictors included in both that study and this one, as well as Hough (1998) and Hough, Oswald, and Ployhart (2001) regarding the low d-scores of personality traits.”
THE DIVERSITY–VALIDITY DILEMMA: STRATEGIES FOR REDUCING RACIOETHNIC AND SEX SUBGROUP DIFFERENCES AND ADVERSE IMPACT IN SELECTION (2008, neutral): “Unless noted, d-values come from Hough et al. (2001).”
GROUP DIFFERENCES IN PERSONALITY: META‐ANALYSES COMPARING FIVE U.S. RACIAL GROUPS (2008, background): “It has been suggested that higher order factors, such as the Big Five, constitute too broad a framework to explore subgroup differences in personality (Hough et al., 2001).”
An Investigation of Broad and Narrow Personality Traits in Relation to General and Domain-Specific Life Satisfaction of College Students (2005, background): “In contrast, personality measures show little or no adverse impact on ethnic, gender, or national origin sub-groups (Hogan, Hogan and Roberts, 1996; Hough, Oswald and Ployhart, 2001 ).”
An Investigation of Personality Traits in Relation to Intention to Withdraw From College (2004, background): “Another appeal of using personality traits in selection decisions is that, unlike cognitive aptitude or intelligence measures, there are usually no significant differences between different racial or ethic groups on personality scores (Hogan, Hogan, & Roberts, 1996; Hough, Oswald, & Ployhart, 2001 ”
Personnel selection. (2008, background): “A major review by Hough et al. (2001) summarized the evidence for differences by race/ethnicity, gender, and age for a broad range of predictors, including cognitive abilities, personality, physical ability, assessment centers, biodata, interviews, and work samples.”
Social Media in Employee-Selection-Related Decisions (2016, background): “More specific cognitive abilities, such as verbal ability, are also associated with ethnic group differences (Hough et al., 2001).”