Moderation of selection procedure validity by employee race
Abstract
Purpose – The aim of this study was to examine the effects of employee race on the validity of commonly used selection procedures over three time periods after hire.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Other authors have found that CAT performance was less predictive of job performance.
“and less predictive of job performance (Gardner & Deadrick, 2008, 2012).”
From Factors Related to Mean Score Group Differences on Cognitive Ability Tests: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as Gardner & Deadrick, 2012
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 44 · Cited by 6
- Authors
- Gardner, D. G., & Deadrick, D. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Colorado Colorado Springs (US)
- Old Dominion University (US)
- ORCID
- Gardner, Donald G.
- Venue
- Journal of Managerial Psychology
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2012-04-27
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 365-382
- ISSN
- 0268-3946 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1969069186
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Managerial Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employer Branding and e-HRM
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › AI and HR Technologies
- Keywords
- selection methods, selection validity, racial bias in hiring, personnel selection
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
