Department of Management, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306-1110, USA.
J Appl Psychol. 2011 Nov;96(6):1167-94. doi: 10.1037/a0024343. Epub 2011 Jul 11.
A common belief among researchers is that vocational interests have limited value for personnel selection. However, no comprehensive quantitative summaries of interests validity research have been conducted to substantiate claims for or against the use of interests. To help address this gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of relations between interests and employee performance and turnover using data from 74 studies and 141 independent samples. Overall validity estimates (corrected for measurement error in the criterion but not for range restriction) for single interest scales were .14 for job performance, .26 for training performance, -.19 for turnover intentions, and -.15 for actual turnover. Several factors appeared to moderate interest-criterion relations. For example, validity estimates were larger when interests were theoretically relevant to the work performed in the target job. The type of interest scale also moderated validity, such that corrected validities were larger for scales designed to assess interests relevant to a particular job or vocation (e.g., .23 for job performance) than for scales designed to assess a single, job-relevant realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, or conventional (i.e., RIASEC) interest (.10) or a basic interest (.11). Finally, validity estimates were largest when studies used multiple interests for prediction, either by using a single job or vocation focused scale (which tend to tap multiple interests) or by using a regression-weighted composite of several RIASEC or basic interest scales. Overall, the results suggest that vocational interests may hold more promise for predicting employee performance and turnover than researchers may have thought.
研究人员普遍认为，职业兴趣对人员选拔的价值有限。然而，尚未进行全面的定量综合研究，以证实使用或不使用兴趣的主张。为了帮助解决这一差距，我们使用来自 74 项研究和 141 个独立样本的数据，对兴趣与员工绩效和离职之间的关系进行了元分析。对单个兴趣量表进行校正（校正了标准中的测量误差，但未校正范围限制）后的整体有效性估计值分别为：工作绩效为.14，培训绩效为.26，离职意向为 -.19，实际离职为 -.15。有几个因素似乎对兴趣与标准的关系产生了影响。例如，当兴趣与目标工作中的工作具有理论相关性时，有效性估计值会更大。兴趣量表的类型也会影响有效性，例如，旨在评估与特定工作或职业相关的兴趣的量表（例如，工作绩效为.23）的校正有效性大于旨在评估单个与工作相关的现实、调查、艺术、社会、创业或传统（即 RIASEC）兴趣（.10）或基本兴趣（.11）的量表。最后，当研究使用多个兴趣进行预测时，有效性估计值最大，要么使用单个专注于工作或职业的量表（这些量表往往可以挖掘多个兴趣），要么使用 RIASEC 或基本兴趣量表的多个回归加权组合。总的来说，结果表明，职业兴趣在预测员工绩效和离职方面可能比研究人员认为的更有希望。
