Advertisement

Journal of Business and Psychology

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 51–59 | Cite as

Psychometric Properties of a Structured Behavioral Interview to Hire Private Security Personnel

  • Silvia Moscoso
  • Jesús F. Salgado
Article

Abstract

This paper reports on a study about the reliability and validity of a structured behavioral interview to assess private security personnel. Reliability was estimated using interrater coefficients. Two independent interviewers were used to rate each interviewee. Results show a reliability coefficient of .81 (N = 43) and .89 with Spearman-Brown correction for two raters. Validity was estimated using a content validation approach. This strategy was suggested by Lawshe (1975) to estimate the content validity of selection tests. So far, only two studies carried out by Schmitt and Ostroff (1986) and Carrier et al. (1990) have used Lawshe's strategy in the structured behavioral interview case. The interview consisted of seven questions and each was rated by 11 experts in the job. Results show a significant content validity ratio (CVR) for majority of the questions in the interview and a content validity index (CVI) of .89. Implications of these findings for the practice of the structured behavioral interview are discussed and future research is suggested.

Structured-behavior interview behavior description interview content validity reliability 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Arvey, R.D. & Campion, J.E. (1982). The employment interview: A summary and review of recent research. Personnel Psychology, 35, 281-322.Google Scholar
  2. Carrier, M.R., Dalessio A.T. & Brown S.H. (1990). Correspondence between estimates of content and criterion-related validity values. Personnel Psychology, 43, 85-100.Google Scholar
  3. Conway, J.M., Jako, R.A. & Goodman, D.F. (1995). A meta-analysis of interevaluador and internal consistency reliability of selection interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 565-579.Google Scholar
  4. Flanagan, J.C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 327-358.Google Scholar
  5. Green, P.C. & Hogan, D.D. (1982). Behavioral interviewing. Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
  6. Hunter, J.E. & Hunter, R.F. (1984). Validity and utility of alternative predictors of job performance. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 72-98.Google Scholar
  7. Janz, T. (1982). Initial comparations of patterned behavior description interviews versus unstructured interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 577,580.Google Scholar
  8. Janz, T. (1989). The patterned behavior description interview: The best prophet of the future is the past. In R.W. Eder and G.R. Ferris (Eds.), The Employment interview: Theory, research and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Latham, G.P. (1989). The reliability, validity and practicality of the situational interview. In R.W. Eder and G.R. Ferris (Eds.). The Employment interview: Theory, research and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Latham, G.P., Saari, L.M., Pursell, E.D. & Campion, M.A. (1980). The situational interview. Journal of Applied of Psychology, 65, 442-431.Google Scholar
  11. Lawshe, C.H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28, 563-575.Google Scholar
  12. Mayfield, E.C. (1964). The selection interview: A re-evaluation of published research. Personnel Psychology, 17, 239-260.Google Scholar
  13. Mayfield, E.C., Brown, S.H. & Hamstra, B.W. (1980). Selection interviewing in the life insurance industry: An update of research and practice. Personnel Psychology, 33, 725-739.Google Scholar
  14. McDaniel, M.A., Whetzel, D.L., Schmidt, F.L. & Maurer, S. (1994). The validity of employment interview: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 599-617.Google Scholar
  15. Motowidlo, S.J., Carter, G.W., Dunnette, M.D., Tippins, N., Werner, S., Burnett, J.R. & Vaughan, J. (1992). Studies of structured behavioral interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 571-588.Google Scholar
  16. Salgado, J.F. (1999). Personnel selecton methods. In C.L. Cooper and I.T. Robertson (Eds.) International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
  17. Salgado, J.F. & Moscoso, S. (1995). Validez de las entrevistas conductuales estructuradas. [Structured behavioral interview validity]. Psicología del Trabajo y las Organizaciones, 11, 9-24.Google Scholar
  18. Schmidt, F.L. & Hunter, J.E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274.Google Scholar
  19. Schmitt, N. (1976). Social and situational determinants of interview decisions: Implications for the employment interview. Personnel Psychology, 29, 79-101.Google Scholar
  20. Schmitt, N. & Ostroff, C. (1986). Operationalizing the “behavioral consistency” approach: Selection test development based on a content-oriented strategy. Personnel Psychology, 39, 91-108.Google Scholar
  21. Schüler, H. (1989). Construct validity of a multimodal employment interview. In Fallon, B.J., Pfister, H.P. and Brebner, J. (Eds.), Advances in industrial and organizational psychology. New York: North Holland.Google Scholar
  22. Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc. (1987). Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection procedures (3rd ed.). College Park, MD: Author.Google Scholar
  23. Wagner, R. (1949). The employment interview: A critical review. Personnel Psychology, 2, 17-46.Google Scholar
  24. Wiesner, W.H. & Cronshaw, S.F. (1988). The moderating impact of interview format and degree of structure on interview validity. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61, 275-290.Google Scholar
  25. Wright, O.R. (1969). Summary of research on the selection interview since 1964. Personnel Psychology, 22, 391-413.Google Scholar
  26. Wright, P.M., Lichtenfelds, P.A. & Pursell, E.D. (1989). The structured interview: Additional studies and meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 62, 191-199.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Silvia Moscoso
    • 1
  • Jesús F. Salgado
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Psicología Social y BásicaUniversidad de Santiago de CompostelaSpain

Personalised recommendations