The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings is a broader and (IMO) nice overview of this stuff. Here’s a snippet from the central table:
Oh interesting. That does look cool, though it’s 20 years old.
Seems like they found a different result than Iddekinge et al. 2019 re: job experience – 0.18 rather than no correlation.
My intuition is that there is some effect from learning how to work a desk job, so I’m inclined to side with Schmidt & Hunter.
They actually have a working paper for an updated version that I was just able to dig up (the links from Google Scholar seem broken ATM): The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 100 Years of Research Findings.
Very valuable piece, and likely worth a separate write up.
The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings is a broader and (IMO) nice overview of this stuff. Here’s a snippet from the central table:
Oh interesting. That does look cool, though it’s 20 years old.
Seems like they found a different result than Iddekinge et al. 2019 re: job experience – 0.18 rather than no correlation.
My intuition is that there is some effect from learning how to work a desk job, so I’m inclined to side with Schmidt & Hunter.
They actually have a working paper for an updated version that I was just able to dig up (the links from Google Scholar seem broken ATM): The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 100 Years of Research Findings.
Very valuable piece, and likely worth a separate write up.