Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry-level jobs.

verifiedrich profile · Journal of Applied Psychology · 1994

Huffcutt, Allen I.; Arthur, Winfred

10.1037/0021-9010.79.2.184 · CrossRef: verified

How this was studied

paradigm: positivistpurpose: explanatory causaldesign: meta analytic synthesisidentification: nonetime: cross sectionaldata: quantitative survey

A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.

analysis: meta analysis · validity (validity): internal addressed · external unclear · construct addressed · statistical addressed · classifier confidence 0.85

What this article reports

The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.

unstructured employment interviewstask performance

r = 0.2 · k=15 · grade A · unverified

employment interviewtask performance

r = 0.37 · k=114 · grade B · unverified

Models this article informs

The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.

In the authors’ words

The article’s own abstract.

The present investigation provides a reanalysis of the employment interview for entry-level jobs that overcomes several limitations of J. E. Hunter and R. F. Hunter's (1984) article. Using a relatively sophisticated multidimensional framework for classifying level of structure, the authors obtained results from a meta-analysis of 114 entry-level interview validity coefficients suggesting that (a) structure is a major moderator of interview validity; (b) interviews, particularly when structured, can reach levels of validity that are comparable to those of mental ability tests; and (c) although validity does increase through much of the range of structure, there is a point at which additional structure yields essentially no incremental validity. Thus, results suggested a ceiling effect for structure. Limitations and directions for future research are discussed

What the literature says about it

Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.

0 supporting2 disputing

Ancillary research

Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.

Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.