Job-specific applicant pools and national norms for personality scales: Implications for range-restriction corrections in validation research.

This article compares variability in national norms to variability in job-specific applicant pools for personality scales. Across 23,231 job applicants for 111 jobs, we found that job-specific applicant pools were slightly less variable than broad normative data (by about 4%) based on a national norm sample of 40,474 job applicants. For some personality variables, the amount of variability reduction correlated with work characteristics as captured by the Data, People and Things scales of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (US Department of Labor, 1977). Most correlations were small in magnitude. In general, the small reductions in job-specific applicant pool variability provide evidence that researchers' decisions to use manual norm group standard deviations in range restriction corrections has not appreciably inflated the personality-criterion relationships studied. Implications for attraction and gravitation to jobs are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Long-term predictive and construct validity of two traditional predictors of law school performance.

The relative contribution of undergraduate GPA (UGPA) and the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) to predicting academic performance in each of the 3 yrs of law school was investigated in a heterogeneous sample of 23 law schools. The contribution of each measure was uneven across years, with the LSAT making its greatest contribution in early years and UGPA in later years. Differences between law school years with respect to the nature of instructional techniques and curricular emphases were examined to explore the construct validity of each measure as a predictor of performance in law school. Results are consistent with the test sponsor's interpretation of the LSAT as a measure of the ability to confront new situations and new problems such as those encountered in the 1st yr of law school. Results are also consistent with an interpretation of UGPA as a measure not only of academic competence but also qualities such as persistence and motivation. (29 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction of validity coefficients for direct restriction in range occasioned by univariate selection.

Frequently, in evaluating a selection instrument, criterion data are available only for those applicants selected. Validities computed on the selectees are reduced by restriction in range and do not reflect the actual utility of the predictors. K. Pearson's (1903) correction for direct restriction in range uses the restricted validity (computed in the selectee group) and the predictor standard deviations in the unrestricted and the restricted groups. Often, the applicant group predictor standard deviation is not available. However, the practitioner may know, or be able to estimate, the selection ratio. An equation and a table for estimating the unrestricted validity from the restricted validity and the selection ratio are provided. (5 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Opening up in the classroom: Effects of expressive writing on graduate school entrance exam performance.

Our study sought to determine whether experimental disclosure could improve exam performance and psychological health in students taking a graduate school entrance exam. Students preparing for the GRE, MCAT, LSAT, or PCAT were randomly assigned to write expressively about their upcoming exam or to a neutral writing condition. Participants completed measures of depressive symptoms and test anxiety before and after writing, and exam scores were collected. The experimental disclosure group had significantly higher test scores and significantly lower pre-exam depressive symptoms than the neutral writing group. Although benefits for depressive symptoms were found in expressive writers regardless of exam type, the advantage of expressive writing for test performance was only observed in students taking the MCAT or LSAT. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Antireligious prejudice in admissions to doctoral programs in clinical psychology.

A mock application to graduate school was evaluated by 356 professors of clinical psychology. Ss were more likely to admit an applicant who made no mention of religion than they were to admit an otherwise identical applicant who was identified as an evangelical fundamentalist Christian, although evaluations did not significantly differ between evangelical applicants who did or did not indicate a desire to integrate their religious orientation in their practice of psychology. Implications are discussed in relation to the ethical standards of the American Psychological Association and to the potential negative impact on the provision of psychological services to members of religious groups. (14 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Nonwhite Students in Counseling Psychology: A Closer Look.

Thirty-three doctoral programs responded to a survey assessing the racial/ethnic composition of doctoral students and student applicants. Different conclusions were drawn from four methods that were used to calculate the representation of the racial/ethnic groups in the applicant pools and enrollments in American Psychological Association (APA) and non-APA-approved counseling psychology programs. The data suggest that underrepresentation of nonwhites in our graduate programs is not due to the differential utilization of admissions standards for nonwhites, as opposed to other applicants, but rather to the small number of nonwhite students who apply. Although most programs design activities to recruit nonwhite applicants, few programs do as much as possible. Suggestions are presented for making psychology in general, and counseling psychology in particular, more attractive to undergraduate blacks. More nonwhites must view psychology as an appropriate major if the potential pool of graduate school applicants is to increase. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Looked over or overlooked? Prescreening decisions and postinterview evaluations.

Past research indicates that interviewers' initial impressions of job applicants affect their subsequent evaluations. These findings, however, come either from naturalistic studies that do not control for the applicants' qualifications or from laboratory experiments that cannot assess what occurs in real interviews. The present study examined preinterview impressions and postinterview evaluations in the context of prescreening decisions. Job applicants who were prescreened into interviews were judged more favorably by recruiters than applicants who were not prescreened. Because many applicants were prescreened by some organizations and not by others, the authors were able to control for applicant qualifications and show that the same individuals were rated more favorably when prescreened than when not prescreened. Finally, the results ruled out the possibility that findings simply reflect accurate preinterview assessments of applicant-job "fit." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effect of disability, gender, and job level on ratings of job applicants.

Objective: To examine the effects of applicant disability, gender, and job level on ratings of job applicants. Design and Participants: Full-time workers (n?=?88) and undergraduates (n?=?98) provided ratings of hypothetical job applicants who differed on the 3 factors of interest. Measures: Job applicants were evaluated on the basis of competence, overall recommendation, potency, activity, and starting salary. Results: Applicants with disabilities were generally rated significantly higher in activity and potency than the applicant without a disability. Additional analyses revealed a significant Gender X Job Level interaction for applicants with a disability. Conclusions: Consistent with D. T. Wegener and R. E. Petty's (1997) flexible correction model, the results of this study suggest that evaluations of job applicants with disabilities may depend on the amount of cognitive resources raters have available at the time the evaluations are made. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correlational tests of predictions from a process model of the interview.

We conducted a field study to test eight propositions derived from a process model of the selection interview (Dipboye, 1982; Dipboye & Macan, 1988). According to the model, interviewers' preinterview impressions of an applicant bias the subsequent conduct of the interview and processing of information in the direction of confirming these initial impressions. To test predictions from the model, we surveyed managers and the applicants they interviewed in each of 164 interviews. In support of the model, interviewers' preinterview evaluations were positively related to postinterview evaluations of applicant qualifications and process variables predicted to mediate this relation. Results also supported the model in that interviewers with favorable preinterview impressions were more likely to attribute good interview performances to the applicants' qualifications for the job and poor performances to external factors. Contrary to the model, confidence failed to moderate the above findings, and preinterview impressions were not predictive of applicant reports of interviewers' time spent in questioning. Some possible implications of the model for future research and for improving interview practice are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Making those who cannot see look best: Effects of visual resume formatting on ratings of job applicants with blindness.

Objective: Although general attitudes toward individuals with disabilities are often positive, these perceptions do not always lead to equal footing in the hiring process. This study examined stereotypes of job applicants perceived to be blind and the role of applicant blindness in hireability ratings made by human resource managers. Specifically, we highlighted a unique challenge for individuals who cannot see: the visual formatting of resumes. Design: Human resource managers (N = 249) evaluated the visually formatted or unformatted resumes of hypothetical job applicants who were portrayed as blind or sighted and rated applicant hireability and personality characteristics. Results: Although applicants perceived to be blind were perceived as more conscientious and agreeable by human resource managers, these positive evaluations did not translate into favorable hireability evaluations. Conclusion: Because human resource managers severely penalize applicants who do not attend to visual, nonfunctional resume presentation, applicants who cannot see are apt to find themselves disadvantaged in the hiring process. The implications of these findings for organizations, job seekers, and rehabilitation professionals are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reply to Douglas Davis.

D. A. Davis (see record 1980-03618-001) questioned E. J. Langer and R. P. Abelson's (see record 1974-25775-001) analysis of the biased clinical assessments of those who are labeled patient vs those labeled job applicant. Davis asserted that those divergent assessments are justified in light of distinctive base rates for psychopathology in patients vs job applicants. The plausibility and appropriateness of this use of base rate are addressed. (3 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of Stress Inoculation Training for 1st-Year Law Students.

The effects of stress inoculation training (SIT) on the anxiety, stress, irrationality, and academic performance of 1st-year law students were examined. A 2 x 3 repeated-measures crossover design was used in which the middle assessment occasion marked when control participants began receiving SIT. Compared with those in the control phase, participants initially receiving SIT showed decrements on personal, emotional, and general stress. Additional analyses indicated that all participants who received SIT displayed lower levels of anxiety, stress, and irrationality over time. Finally, the academic ranks of participants predicted to finish in the bottom 20% of their class on the basis of LSAT scores reflected conspicuous and significant improvement. SIT has promising applicability to the high levels of stress experienced by 1st-year law students. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Fair selection decisions.

Judges were asked to fairly assign priority ratings to hypothetical candidates applying to medical school, given information about their Medical College Aptitude Test scores, grade-point averages, and group memberships (majority or minority). The affirmative action goal and the qualifications of minorities relative to majorities in the applicant pool were also manipulated. When there is no specified affirmative action goal nor differences between groups in the applicant pool, minorities and majorities are treated similarly. When either group differences in the applicant pool occur or affirmative action goals are introduced, decision makers assign higher priority ratings to minorities than to equally qualified majority applicants. When both factors are operating, minorities receive an even bigger boost. Results are consistent with the hypothesis that decision makers evaluate minority and majority candidates in the same way; differences between groups occur in the response function. Equally qualified majority and minority candidates are assigned to different categories, depending on the size of the affirmative action goal and the extent to which the two groups differ in the applicant pool. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Applicant self-selection: Correlates of withdrawal from a multiple hurdle process.

The authors examined applicant self-selection from a multiple hurdle hiring process. The relationships of the selection status of 3,550 police applicants (self-selected out prior to 1 of the hurdles, passing, or failing) and perceptions of the organization, commitment to a law enforcement job, expectations regarding the job, employment status, the need to relocate, the opinions of family and friends, and perceptions, of the hiring process were examined. Differences between those who stayed in the process and those who self-selected out were observed in most areas, and those who self-selected out at early stages differed from those self-selecting out at later stages. African Americans' and women's perceptions also differed from the majority group, indicating some of the difficulties an organization faces in attempting to diversify. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Selection fairness information and applicant reactions: A longitudinal field study.

Although laboratory studies have found that selection information can affect applicant perceptions, this has not been tested in the field. The authors followed 2 cohorts of police applicants (N = 274) in a longitudinal study to examine the relationship between information, applicant perceptions, and behavior (e.g., turnover). Information was related to perceived fairness measured at the time of testing and 1 month later when applicants received their results. Information moderated the relationship between outcome favorability and test-taking self-efficacy among African Americans but not among Whites. Information was not related to the behavioral measures. The discussion focuses on why certain findings from previous studies were not replicated and on the use of information when applicants have an investment in getting a job. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Job-specific applicant pools and national norms for cognitive ability tests: Implications for range restriction corrections in validation research.

Correcting validity coefficients for range restriction requires the applicant pool predictor standard deviation (SD). As this is frequently unknown, some researchers use national norm SDs as estimates of the applicant pool SD. To test the proposition that job-specific applicant pools are markedly more homogeneous than broad samples of applicants for many jobs, job-specific applicant pool SDs on the Wonderlic Personnel Test for 80 jobs were compared with a large multijob applicant sample. For jobs at other than the lowest level of complexity, job-specific applicant pool SDs average 10% lower than the broad norm group SDs. 90% of the job-specific applicant pool SDs lie within 20% of the norm group SD, suggesting that reducing a norm group SD by 20% provides a conservative estimate of the applicant pool SD for use in range restriction corrections for other than low-complexity jobs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Internship selection: Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

As an internship applicant, do you know what internship agencies look for to select or exclude you from further consideration? In a survey, the authors examined exclusion and inclusion criteria used at 402 internship sites accredited by the American Psychological Association (APA). The 249 respondents (62%) rated fit between applicant goals and site opportunities as the most important inclusion criteria. Four exclusion criteria (lack of completion of orals, lack of APA status of doctoral program, poor fit between applicant goals and site opportunities, and incomplete doctoral course work) were most commonly used to eliminate applicants from consideration. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A review of female–male score differences on the Strong-Campbell twin occupational scales.

The current version of the Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory (SCII) contains 37 occupational scales that are "twin" scales (TS), with one scale based on female norms and another based on male norms. (The general pattern of scores on the SCII TS is for test takers to receive higher scores on the other-sex scale than they do on their same-sex scale.) However, the various occupational scales differ from one another in their patterns of score differences. Four studies of the SCII TS—B. F. Laime and D. G. Zytowsky (1963), J. D. Stanfel (1970), P. H. Munley et al (1973), and P. W. Lunneborg (1975)—were reviewed, and correlations were developed to show the degree of similarity in the results. Various explanations for the phenomena have been advanced, relating the score differentials to the masculinity or femininity of the occupations. These explanations were tested with the SCII differential score data with only partial success. Findings indicate that counselors will need to know average female and male test-taker scores on other-sex occupational scales to make accurate SCII test interpretations. (12 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-reports versus unobtrusive measures: Balancing method variance and ethical concerns in employment discrimination research.

Compared the results obtained from 2 different data collection methods employed in a study of the impact of affirmative action pressures on the recruitment practices of organizations. In the 1st study, bogus resumés portraying work and educational experiences of 2 racially different applicants were sent to 240 employment managers of companies with affirmative action programs. These data were collected unobtrusively (i.e., Ss were not aware of the experimental manipulation). In a 2nd study, another sample of 240 employment managers was drawn from the same population and asked to provide self-reports about employment action they would take if the 2 bogus resumés represented actual applicants. The 2 different data collection methods revealed strikingly different employment action techniques. Employment managers who provided self-reports were prone to treat the 2 applicants equally and somewhat more favorably in their employment decisions. In contrast, employment managers who were unaware of their role in the study tended to make more employment decisions based on the race of the job applicant. (6 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)