Inclusive and discrimination-free personnel selection (IPS) is one of the most critical processes in the Human Resource Management system in inclusive organizations because it determines the efficiency of many other subsequent HRM practices (e.g., training, promotion, and turnover). IPS represents one of the critical “barriers to entry” for individuals to any work organization. In this sense, fairness, equality, and nondiscrimination in the access to employment in a diverse workplace are fundamental objectives that can be achieved through social dialogue. IPS can be conceptualized as procedurally fair. This chapter is organized into three main sections as well as an introduction to relevant concepts within the IPS. The first one introduces some of the most relevant techniques for selection, together with the evidence of criterion-oriented validity, which is the first aspect to be taken into account in inclusive and nondiscrimination in IPS and includes several recommendations on this discrimination-free personnel selection. The second section is devoted to the empirical research on applicant perceptions and reactions to selection techniques and the implications for the practice of IPS. In the third and final section, several justice principles and recommendations are established to evaluate whether a personnel selection procedure is inclusive and discrimination-free.
This chapter was partially supported by Grant PSI2014-56615-P from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness to Silvia Moscoso and Jesús F. Salgado and by Grant PSI2013-44584-R to Antonio García-Izquierdo.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
In personnel selection, coefficients of less than .15 are usually considered to be scarcely valid; The validity between .16 and .30 is usually considered small; Moderately valid coefficients between .31 and .40 and of appreciable validity the coefficients greater than .40. From .50, it is understood that the validity is excellent. However, it is also necessary to take into account the type of criterion being predicted and that some instruments that show little validity may, however, be interesting, since such validity could increase that achieved by other instruments.
Operational validity is the correlation between an assessment method (e.g., interview) and job performance after correction for job performance reliability and any range restriction in the measure used.
Forced choice (FC) is a specific format of rating procedures. The FC method gives the individual (e.g., the applicant) a number of words or phrases, along with instructions to select the ones he or she most or least likes. The number of words or phrases may be, for instance, pairs, triads, or tetrads, which are paired in terms of an index of preference and discrimination (e.g., social desirability). Three types of scores can be obtained from a FC personality inventory (ipsative, quasi-ipsative, and normative). Quasi-ipsative inventories include measures that do not totally meet the criterion of pure ipsativity, because, for example, not all alternatives ranked by respondents are scored or the scales have different numbers of items.
Alonso, P., Moscoso, S., & Salgado, J. F. (2017). Structured behavioral interview as a legal guarantee for ensuring equal employment opportunities for women: A meta-analysis. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 9, 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.ejpal.2016.03.002.
Anderson, N. R. (2001). Towards a theory of socialization impact: Selection and pre-entry socialization. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 84–91. doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00165.
Anderson, N. R. (2003). Applicant and recruiter reactions to new technology in selection: A critical review and agenda for future research. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 121–136. doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00235.
Anderson, N. R. (2004). The dark side of the moon: applicant perspectives, negative psychological effects (NPEs), and candidate decision making in selection. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12, 1–8. doi:10.1111/j.0965-075X.2004.00259.x.
Anderson, N. R., Lievens, F., van Dam, K., & Ryan, A. M. (2004). Future perspectives on employee selection: Key directions for future research and practice. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53, 487–501. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00183.x.
Anderson, N. R., & Ostroff, C. (1997). Selection as socialization. In N. Anderson & P. Herriott (Eds.), International handbook of selection and assessment (pp. 413–440). London, UK: Wiley.
Anderson, N. R., Salgado, J. F., & Hülsheger, U. R. (2010). Applicant reactions in selection: Comprehensive meta-analysis into reaction generalization versus situational specificity. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18, 291–304. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00512.x.
Bastida, M., & Moscoso, S. (2015). Steel barrier: Legal implications from a gender equal opportunity perspective. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 7, 13–22. doi:10.1016/j.ejpal.2014.11.004.
Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., Sanchez, R. J., Craig, J., Ferrara, P., & Campion, M. A. (2001). Applicant reactions to selection: Development of the selection procedural justice scale (SPJS). Personnel Psychology, 54, 387–419. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00097.
Bauer, T. N., McCarthy, J., Anderson, N., Truxillo, D. M., & Salgado, J. F. (2012). What we know about applicant reactions on attitudes and behavior: Research summary and best practices. Bowling Green, OH: Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
Council Directive. (2000a). 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin.
Council Directive. (2000b). 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation.
Crosby, F. J., Iyer, A., & Sincharoen, S. (2006). Understanding affirmative action. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 585–611.
Directive. (2006). 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation.
Folger, R. (1977). Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of ‘voice’ and improvement on experienced inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 108–119. doi:10.1037/0022-35188.8.131.52.
García-Izquierdo, A. L., & García-Izquierdo, M. (2007). Discriminación, igualdad de oportunidades en el empleo y selección de personal en España [Discrimination, equal employment opportunities and personnel selection in Spain]. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 23, 111–138.
Gilliland, S. W. (1993). The perceived fairness of selection systems: An organizational justice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 18, 694–734. doi:10.5465/AMR.1993.9402210155.
Gaugler, B. B., Rosenthal, D. B., Thorton, G. C., & Bentson, C. (1987). Meta-analysis of assessment center validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 493–511. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.72.3.493.
Hausknecht, J. P., Day, D. V., & Thomas, S. C. (2004). Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 57, 639–683. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00003.x.
Huffcutt, A. I., Roth, P. L., & McDaniel, M. (1996). A meta-analytic investigation of cognitive ability in employment interview evaluations: Moderating characteristics and implications for incremental validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 459–473. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.5.459.
Hunter, J. E., & Hunter, R. F. (1984). Validity and utility of alternative predictors of job performance. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 72–98. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.96.1.72.
Judge, T. A., Rodell, J. B., Klinger, E. R., Simon, L. S., & Crawford, E. R. (2013). Hierarchical representations of the five-factor model of personality in predicting job performance: Integrating three organizing frameworks with two theoretical perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 875–925. doi:10.1037/a0033901.
Kehoe, J., Mol, S., & Anderson, N. R. (2017). Managing sustainable selection programs. In J. L. Farr & N. T. Tippins (Eds.), Handbook of personnel selection (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
McCarthy, J. M., Bauer T. N., Truxillo, D. M., Anderson N. R., Costa A. C., & Ahmed, S. (2017). Applicant perspectives during selection: A review addressing “So What?”, “What’s New?” and “Where to Next?”. Journal of Management, 43, 1693–1725. doi:10.1177/0149206316681846.
McDaniel, M. A., Hartman, N. S., Whetzel, D. L., & Grubb, W. (2007). Situational judgment tests, response instructions, and validity: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60, 201–210. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00065.
Moscoso, S., García-Izquierdo, A. L., & Bastida, M. (2012). A mediation model of individual differences in attitudes toward affirmative actions for women. Psychological Reports, 110(3), 764–780. doi:10.2466/01.07.17.PR0.110.3.764-780.
Moscoso, S., Salgado, J., & Anderson, N. R. (2017). How do I get a job, what are they looking for? Personnel Selection and Assessment. In N. Chmiel, F. Fraccaroli, & S. Magnus (Eds.), An introduction to work and organizational psychology: An international perspective (3rd ed.). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Nauta, A. (2015). Industrial Relations and works councils in the Netherlands. Results from interviews and a survey among HR managers. In M. Euwema, L. Munduate, P. Elgoibar, E. Pender, & A.B. García. (Eds.), Promoting social dialogue in European Organizations. London: Springer Open.
Ployhart, R. E., & Harold, C. M. (2004). The applicant attribution-reaction theory (AART): An integrative theory of applicant attributional processing. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12, 84–98. doi:10.1111/j.0965-075X.2004.00266.x.
Roth, P. L., Bobko, P., & McFarland, L. A. (2005). A meta-analysis of work sample test validity: Updating and integrating some classical literature. Personnel Psychology, 58, 1009–1037. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00714.x.
Ryan, A. M., & Ployhart, R. E. (2000). Applicants’ perceptions of selection procedures and decisions: A critical review and agenda for the future. Journal of Management, 26, 565–606. doi:10.1177/014920630002600308.
Salgado, J. F. (2007). Análisis de la utilidad económica de la entrevista conductual estructurada en la selección de personal de la Administración General del Pais Vasco. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y las Organizaciones, 23, 139–154.
Salgado, J. F. (2017). Personnel selection. Encyclopedia of psychology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Salgado, J. F., & Anderson, N. (2002). Cognitive and GMA testing in the European Community: Issues and evidence. Human Performance, 15, 75–96. doi:10.1080/08959285.2002.9668084.
Salgado, J. F., & Anderson, N. (2003). Validity generalization of GMA tests across countries in the European Community. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 12, 1–17. doi:10.1080/13594320244000292.
Salgado, J. F., Anderson, N., Moscoso, S., Bertua, C., De Fruyt, F., & Rolland, J. P. (2003). A meta-analytic study of general mental ability validity for different occupations in the European Community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1068–1081. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.1068.
Salgado, J. F., Anderson, N., & Tauriz, G. (2015). The validity of ipsative and quasi-ipsative forced-choice personality inventories for different occupational groups: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88, 797–834. doi:10.1111/joop.12098.
Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S. (1996). Meta-analysis of interrater reliability of job performance ratings in validity studies of personnel selection. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 83, 1195–1201. doi:10.2466/pms.1996.83.3f.1195.
Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S. (2002). Comprehensive meta-analysis of the construct validity of the employment interview. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11, 299–324. doi:10.1080/13594320244000184.
Salgado, J. F., Moscoso, S., & Anderson, N. (2016). Corrections for criterion reliability in validity generalization: The consistency of Hermes, the utility of Midas. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 32, 17–23. doi:10.1016/j.rpto.2015.12.001.
Salgado, J. F., Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2001). Predictors used for personnel selection: An overview of constructs, method and techniques. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work, & organizational psychology, Vol. 1. Personnel psychology (pp. 165–199). London, UK: Sage.
Schmitt, N., & Gilliland, S. W. (1992). Beyond differential prediction: Fairness in selection. In D. M. Saunders (Ed.), New approaches to employee management: Fairness in employee selection (Vol. 1, pp. 21–46). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
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. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262.
Schuler, H. (1993). Social validity of selection situations: A concept and some empirical results. In H. Schuler, J. L. Farr, & N. Schmitt (Eds.), Personnel selection and assessment: Individual and organizational perspectives (pp. 11–26). Mahaw, NJ: Erlbaum.
Truxillo, D. M., Bodner, T. E., Bertolino, M. B., Bauer, T. N., & Yonce, C. A. (2009). Effects of explanations on applicant reactions: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 346–359.
Truxillo, D., Bauer, T., McCarthy, J., Anderson, N. R., & Ahmed, S. (2016). Applicant perspectives on employee selection systems. In D. S. Ones, N. R. Anderson, C. Viswesvaran, & H. K. Sinangil (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage.
Van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–541. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085546.
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Salgado, J.F., Moscoso, S., García-Izquierdo, A.L., Anderson, N.R. (2017). Inclusive and Discrimination-Free Personnel Selection. In: Arenas, A., Di Marco, D., Munduate, L., Euwema, M. (eds) Shaping Inclusive Workplaces Through Social Dialogue. Industrial Relations & Conflict Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66393-7_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66392-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66393-7
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)