The Role of the Traditional Research Design in Underestimating the Validity of the Employment Interview

Building upon the suggestions of Arvey and Campion (1982) and Zedeck, Tziner, and Middlestadt (1983), this paper calls into question the traditional approach to validating the employment interview. A general review of the literature reveals that individuals are likely to differ in their ability to provide accurate predictions of employee behavior and that interviewers often differ in their constant tendency to make favorable or unfavorable ratings. A review of published validation studies shows that most researchers fail to consider these tendencies and, therefore, may be inappropriately collapsing data across multiple interviewers. Through analytic argument we conclude that reviews of the existing literature will likely underestimate the usefulness of this widely used technique.