A comparative study of practitioner perceptions of selection methods in the United Kingdom

Duncan J. R. Jackson, Chris Dewberry, Jaroslava Gallagher, Liam Close

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

13 Citations (Scopus)
176 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In this study, 476 participants, divided into occupational psychology (OP)‐, Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD)‐, human resource management (HRM)‐qualified, and layperson subgroups, provided their perceptions of the validity, fairness, and frequency of use of employee selection methods. Results of a mixed‐effects analysis of covariance revealed that respondent qualification background predicted the degree to which participant validity perceptions were aligned with research‐based estimates of validity, F [3, 29.39] = 20.06, p < .001, η2 = .67. Corrected pairwise comparisons suggested that perceptions of participants with CIPD and HRM backgrounds were not significantly more aligned with research estimates of validity than were the perceptions of laypeople. OP participant validity perceptions were significantly more aligned with research estimates than all other subgroups, (p < .03). Evidence was also found for some between‐group consistency regarding frequency‐of‐use perceptions, but less between‐group consistency was found vis‐à‐vis perceptions of fairness. Implications for decision‐making in employee selection are discussed.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)33-56
JournalJOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
Volume91
Issue number1
Early online date23 Aug 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2018

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A comparative study of practitioner perceptions of selection methods in the United Kingdom'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this