{"title":"Does concurrent validity really estimate predictive validity in psychological testing? Two local studies","authors":"Saul Fine","doi":"10.1111/apps.70001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Concurrent validity designs are used widely in applied psychology as proxy estimates of predictive validity in operational settings, although few primary (local) studies have investigated the generalizability of concurrent validity coefficients empirically. The present study compared the same assessment tool and performance criterion between incumbent and applicant consumer samples from two large financial institutions (<i>N</i> = 2942 and <i>N</i> = 2880), without the common issue of range restriction in the applicant groups. The results found no significant differences in the observed validity coefficients between the groups, despite evidence of impression management in the applicant samples. In addition, range restriction corrections in the concurrent samples would have likely overestimated the predictive validities. Practical implications are briefly discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48289,"journal":{"name":"Applied Psychology-An International Review-Psychologie Appliquee-Revue Internationale","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/apps.70001","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Psychology-An International Review-Psychologie Appliquee-Revue Internationale","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apps.70001","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Concurrent validity designs are used widely in applied psychology as proxy estimates of predictive validity in operational settings, although few primary (local) studies have investigated the generalizability of concurrent validity coefficients empirically. The present study compared the same assessment tool and performance criterion between incumbent and applicant consumer samples from two large financial institutions (N = 2942 and N = 2880), without the common issue of range restriction in the applicant groups. The results found no significant differences in the observed validity coefficients between the groups, despite evidence of impression management in the applicant samples. In addition, range restriction corrections in the concurrent samples would have likely overestimated the predictive validities. Practical implications are briefly discussed.
期刊介绍:
"Applied Psychology: An International Review" is the esteemed official journal of the International Association of Applied Psychology (IAAP), a venerable organization established in 1920 that unites scholars and practitioners in the field of applied psychology. This peer-reviewed journal serves as a global platform for the scholarly exchange of research findings within the diverse domain of applied psychology.
The journal embraces a wide array of topics within applied psychology, including organizational, cross-cultural, educational, health, counseling, environmental, traffic, and sport psychology. It particularly encourages submissions that enhance the understanding of psychological processes in various applied settings and studies that explore the impact of different national and cultural contexts on psychological phenomena.