Stefan Höft
Abstract
After a brief introduction to basic meta-analytic principles, the main statements of the well-known review by Schmidt and Hunter (1998) on the criterion-related validity of personnel selection instruments are summarized. The high validity of cognitive ability tests was also very clearly emphasized by the authors in other publications at that time. In the following, the current criticisms of Sackett, Zhang, Berry, and
Lievens (2022) regarding this study are presented. The focus is on the correction for variance restrictions in the predictor, which Sackett et al. consider too generously applied. The quintessence is the presentation of an updated validity overview based on adjusted reanalyses and new findings. Here, a considerably more homogeneous validity situation is shown with a majority of the coefficients between .20 and .40 across all types of selection procedure. Cognitive ability tests rank only in the midfield, while structured job interviews show the highest values. The conclusion briefly reflects on the consequences of the update for research and practice.
Keywords: criterion-related validity, aptitude testing, meta-analysis, corrections of restriction of variance, personnel selection