Liam
Healy & Associates
chartered occupational psychologists
Validity of Selection and Assessment Tools : A
Discussion
Whereas
reliability concerns the accuracy with which an
instrument measures something, validity is concerned with
what is being measured. The two are related because
before we can talk about what we are measuring we must
have a reliable measure of it - because of this
validity depends on reliability.
The notion of validity is more difficult to get to
grips with than that of reliability, the British
Psychological Society has defined it thus:
Validity is the extent to which a test measures what
it claims to measure - the extent to which it is
possible to make appropriate inferences from the test
scores (BPS Steering Committee on Test
Standards).
What this means is that when we claim a measure
has good validity for selecting people for a particular
job, we must show that there is link between what it
measures and the sort of things that people do in that
job. So when we talk about validity we are concerned
with whether a measure actually measures what it claims
to. The concept of validity is not an absolute - simply
saying that a measure is valid is a misnomer because it
will only be valid in certain situations i.e. a
numerical ability test might be valid for selecting
book-keeping clerks, but it would not be valid for
selecting English teachers. There are three categories
of evidence of validity, content-related;
construct-related and criterion-related (note that these
are not three types of validity, just three types of
evidence).
Criterion
related validity provides the most powerful
source of evidence for the predictive power of a
selection system.
It is the most important and most
widely used evidence of validity, and is concerned with
comparing the test score to some external criterion
such as job performance. There are two main methods
of calculating criterion-related validity:
predictive and concurrent,
with predictive validity being the
most powerful.
Content validity is not a
statistical concept and so cannot be described in terms
of a correlation co-efficient, nor does it provide us
with proof of validity since it is part of the system
development process.
Like content validity, construct validity
is not a statistical concept and so cannot be described
in terms of a correlation co-efficient.
Two types of validity which you will come
across are Face and Faith
validity. Neither have any theoretical or
statistical basis and provide no evidence as to what
a measure is actually measuring.
Face validity refers to the acceptability of
the measure to the candidate and what the candidate
thinks the measure is measuring. This is important in obtaining the
candidate’s co-operation and commitment, however,
because a measure looks good means nothing
in terms of validity.
Faith validity refers to the
same types of belief but in this case they are held
by the recruiter. While these are important in
the marketing of selection tools (because nobody
will use a measure if they don’t believe in it)
they are not true sources of evidence of validity
and you should be very wary of any suggestion that
they are.
Please read the sections on
selection system audit and
direct and indirect
discrimination for a discussion on why validity is
so important.
|