Department of Global Leadership and Management.
Department of Psychology.
J Appl Psychol. 2022 Apr;107(4):604-627. doi: 10.1037/apl0000893. Epub 2021 Jun 17.
The current research proposes to incorporate vocational interests into the study of adverse impact (i.e., differential hiring/selection rates between minority and majority groups in employment settings). In the context of high stakes testing (e.g., using cognitive and personality tests), we show how race gaps in vocational interests would correspond to differential rates of job attraction (the attraction process) and various personnel selection outcomes (the selection process), in patterns that are not always intuitive. Using findings from various meta-analyses, we construct a combined correlation matrix of race, vocational interests, cognitive ability, and Conscientiousness; and provide mathematical formulas to assess the role of vocational interests in determining subgroup differences on predictors in applicant pools. Results and empirical examples suggest: (a) applicant attraction based on vocational interests can reduce adverse impact potential when the interest favors the minority [majority] group and is negatively [positively] related to the predictor; (b) attraction effects of vocational interests on adverse impact potential are modest; (c) if the vocational interest subgroup mean difference is small relative to other predictors in use, personnel selection on the interest will reduce adverse impact potential; (d) attraction effects tend to dampen or remove the selection effects of vocational interests on adverse impact potential, due to variance restriction on interests in the applicant pool; and (e) selection effects tend to be much stronger than attraction effects. These findings have implications for how adverse impact might differ systematically across job types, partly due to attraction and selection effects involving race differences in vocational interests. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
当前的研究提出将职业兴趣纳入负面效应(即在就业环境中,少数群体和多数群体之间的差异雇佣/选拔率)的研究中。在高风险测试(例如,使用认知和人格测试)的背景下,我们展示了职业兴趣的种族差距如何对应于不同的工作吸引力(吸引过程)和各种人员选拔结果(选拔过程),其模式并不总是直观的。我们利用各种元分析的结果,构建了一个种族、职业兴趣、认知能力和尽责性的综合相关矩阵,并提供了数学公式来评估职业兴趣在确定申请人群体中预测因子上的亚组差异方面的作用。结果和实证示例表明:(a) 基于职业兴趣的申请人吸引力可以降低负面效应的潜在风险,当兴趣有利于少数[多数]群体且与预测因子呈负[正]相关时;(b) 职业兴趣对负面效应潜在风险的吸引力效应适中;(c) 如果职业兴趣亚组均值差异相对于使用的其他预测因子较小,则对兴趣进行人员选拔将降低负面效应的潜在风险;(d) 吸引力效应往往会削弱或消除职业兴趣对负面效应潜在风险的选择效应,这是由于申请人群体中对兴趣的方差限制;以及 (e) 选择效应往往比吸引力效应强得多。这些发现对于负面效应如何因工作类型的不同而系统地存在差异具有启示意义,部分原因是职业兴趣的种族差异涉及吸引力和选择效应。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2022 APA,保留所有权利)。