Comprehensive meta-analysis of the construct validity of the employment interview

By Jesús Salgado, Silvia Moscoso. 2002

163 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/eb759a7680ae91d3f22e95b4ab1e5e283bba8034

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 Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The Structured Employment Interview: Narrative and Quantitative Review of the Research Literature (2014, background): “…provide incremental validity over personality tests and cognitive ability tests because they are typically only weakly related to each other (e.g., Berry, Sackett, & Landers, 2007; Cortina, Goldstein, Payne, Davison, & Gilliland, 2000; Huffcutt, Roth, & McDaniel, 1996; Salgado & Moscoso, 2002).”
The Impact of Job Complexity and Study Design on Situational and Behavior Description Interview Validity (2004, result): “This value is slightly lower than the 0.74 value found by Huffcutt and Arthur (1994) but higher than the 0.61 value found by Salgado and Moscoso (2002); given its position between these two more established estimates we went ahead and used the value of 0.70 for the range restriction ratio.”
The employment interview: A review of current studies and directions for future research (2009, background): “In addition to examining cognitive ability and the Big Five personality dimensions in their study, Salgado and Moscoso (2002) explored the relationship between interviews and five other variables: job knowledge, job experience, situational judgment, grade point average, and social skills.”
Verbal and Nonverbal Impression Management Tactics in Behavior Description and Situational Interviews (2006, background): “Clearly, there exist various ways of structuring an employment interview (e.g., Campion, Palmer, & Campion, 1997; Huffcutt & Arthur, 1994; Salgado & Moscoso, 2002).”
A Model of Faking Likelihood in the Employment Interview. (2006, methodology): “Recent meta-analyses of psychological constructs measured in employment interviews revealed seven constructs that could be assessed in the interview (Huffcutt, Conway, Roth, & Stone, 2001; Salgado & Moscoso, 2002).”
A different look at why selection procedures work (2011, background): “…in selection procedures, as well as by the research concerning moderators and mediators of the validity of selection procedures (Huffcutt et al., 2001; Huffcutt, Roth, & McDaniel, 1996; Macan, 2009; Morgeson et al., 2007; Sackett & Lievens, 2008; Salgado & Moscoso, 2002; Woehr & Arthur, 2003).”
Understanding applicant behavior in employment interviews: A theoretical model of interviewee performance (2011, background): “…validity (McDaniel et al., 1994), subgroup differences (Huffcutt & Roth, 1998; see also Campion & Arvey, 1989), and bivariate associations with measures of constructs such as mental ability (e.g., Berry, Sackett, & Landers, 2007; Huffcutt, Roth, & McDaniel, 1996; Salgado & Moscoso, 2002).”