SHL：人才评估有效系数解释指南（英文版）（24页）.pdf

1、Guidance for the Interpretation of Validity Coefficients New research demonstrates issues with how validity coefficients are estimated.3ContentsExecutive Summary 4How Validity is Estimated 6Factors That Affect the Validity Coefficient 7 SHLs Approach 8Meta-analysis 9Problems with Corrections in Meta

2、-analysis 10 Range Restriction 10 Criterion Unreliability 10 Implications 11Variance of Validity Estimates 13 Leadership Validation Study 13 Adverse Impact 15Guidelines for Evaluating Validity Coefficients 16 Type of Study 16 Sample 16 Criterion 17 Corrections 18 Generalizability 20Recommendations f

3、or Correcting Validity Coefficients 224Authors Jeff Johnson,Principal Scientist Paul DeKoekkoek,Science DirectorIn talent assessment,the strongest form of validation evidence is generally considered to come from criterion-related validation,which demonstrates that scores on an assessment(i.e.,the pr

4、edictor)are related to scores on a criterion measure of interest(most often job performance).Criterion-related validity evidence is usually presented in the form of a validity coefficient,or correlation(r),which ranges from 0 to 1 and indicates the magnitude of the relationship between assessment an

5、d criterion scores.There are two primary types of validation studies used to collect criterion-related evidence.Concurrent validation studies collect predictor data(i.e.,assessment scores)from job incumbents and criterion data(e.g.,manager ratings)on those incumbents close together in time.Predictiv

6、e validation studies collect predictor data from job applicants prior to selection and criterion data from those hired after they have been on the job for some time.Each approach results in a validity coefficient that estimates the relationship between predictor and criterion scores.The accuracy of