A META‐ANALYSIS OF THE VALIDITY OF METHODS FOR RATING TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE IN PERSONNEL SELECTION

This paper reviews the validity evidence for systematic methods used to evaluate training and experience (T&E) ratings in personnel selection. Meta‐analytic summaries of the data indicate that validity varies with the type of T&E evaluation procedure used. The lllinois job element and behavioral consistency methods each demonstrated useful levels of validity (.20 and .45, respectively) with small corrected standard deviations, thus supporting validity generalization. Both the point and task methods yielded low mean validities (.11 and .15, respectively) with larger variability. The authors hypothesized that both the point and task methods were affected by a job experience moderator. Partial support for this hypothesis was found. Moderator analyses suggested that the point method was most valid when the applicant pool had low mean levels of job experience and was least valid with an experienced applicant pool. Additional research is desirable on all T&E methods to decrease the potential impact of second‐order sampling error in the meta‐analytic results. Further research is also needed to explicate the constructs measured by T&E evaluations.