King's College London

Research portal

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

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

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)33-56
Issue number1
Early online date23 Aug 2017
Accepted/In press1 Aug 2017
E-pub ahead of print23 Aug 2017
Published1 Mar 2018



King's Authors


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.

Download statistics

No data available

View graph of relations

© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454