No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Going beyond a validity focus to accommodate megatrends in selection system design
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 31 August 2023
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
![Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'](https://static.cambridge.org/content/id/urn%3Acambridge.org%3Aid%3Aarticle%3AS1754942623000287/resource/name/firstPage-S1754942623000287a.jpg)
- Type
- Commentaries
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology
References
Behrens, G., Cunningham, M. R., Jones, J. W., Becker, P., & Thiemann, A. (2021, Sept.). Practicing ethical algorithms in assessment applications: Scientific, operational, and legal perspectives. European Association of Test Publishers Annual Conference, Virtual. ATP Media.Google Scholar
Billings, W. W., & Jones, J. W. (2019). Strategies for the continued use of personnel assessments given the current ultra-tight labor market. Fifth Theory Technical Report.Google Scholar
Casillas, A., Forte, E., & Lai, E. (2019, March). Shifting to a design science paradigm to develop desirable, feasible, and viable tests. Workshop presented at the Annual Conference of the Association of Test Publishers, Orlando, Florida.Google Scholar
Cunningham, M. R., Druen, P. B., Barbee, A. P., Jones, J. W., & Dreschler, B. W. (2021). Causes and consequences of a coronavirus behavioral health mindset: Demographics, personality, occupational interest and COVID-19 prevention behaviors. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 43(2), 120–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dages, K., & Jones, J.W. (2022). Addressing test mastery mindset and deep psychological underminers of testing performance among disadvantaged test takers. Fifth Theory White Paper.Google Scholar
Dages, K., & Jones, J.W. (2023). Development and validation of an analogue measure of neurodiversity among high-stakes test takers: Implications for certification and licensure exams. Technical Report.Google Scholar
Dreschler, B.W., Behrens, G., Cunningham, M.R., & Jones, J.W. (2023). Development and validation of a trauma-informed leadership scale for the Campbell Leadership Index-90 (CLI-90TIL). Fifth Theory, LLC.Google Scholar
Jones, J. W., Orban, J., Dages, K., & McHenry, R. (2016, March). Design considerations for express scales in a digital world. Symposium presented at the Annual Conference of the Association of Test Publishers, Orlando, Florida.Google Scholar
Sackett, P. R., Zhang, C., Berry, C. M., & Lievens, F. (2023). Revisiting the design of selection systems in light of new findings regarding the validity of widely used predictors. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice 16(3), 283–300. https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/7188
CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiner, J., Morin, M., Wiley, A., & Muckle, T. (2022, October). Candidate experience in online testing: Measurement issues, research, and implications for practice. Institute for Credentialing Excellence’s EXG 2022 Conference, Savanah, Georgia.Google Scholar