The Panel Interview: A Review of Empirical Research and Guidelines for Practice

Abstract

After over 50 years of research, the panel interview remains an important yet controversial tool for personnel selection. Previous narrative and metaanalytic reviews have yielded conflicting results concerning its reliability and predictive validity. Furthermore, no review has focused exclusively on the panel interview. By examining the features and psychometric property of the panel interview, we can not only add to the scholarly literature but also determine important, research-based applications for the practitioner. We have derived an eight-step panel interview procedure from previous research. Utilizing this procedure as an organizing framework, this review highlights various features of the panel interview including: setting, struc ture and scoring anchors, question type, training, and rating combination method. Each of these features is discussed in terms of interview trends and in relation to reliability and validity. Practical implications and directions for future research also are addressed. A fter nearly 50 years of research, examining the overall utility of the panel inter view continues to be important, especially given its wide use in the public sector and apparent growing use in the private sector. For practitioners, con siderations such as cost, face validity, adverse impact, and legal defensibility are impor tant when choosing tools for selecting employees. 1 For example, practitioners have argued that the personnel costs (in terms of hours spent interviewing) are greater for panel interviews than those of the individual interview. These costs, however, might be offset by the greater predictive and face validity of panel interviews. 2 In addition, panel interviews may increase buy-in among incumbents regarding the ultimate selec tion decision.^ By examining the features and psychometric properties of panel inter views, we can determine important, research-based implications for the practitioner. One may argue that after 50 years, we have learned all we can about panel inter views. However, based on past meta-analyses, narrative reviews, and empirical research, it is clear that much investigation remains. In spite of the intuitive appeal Downloaded from prompting the use of panel interviews, research findings have generally yielded equiv ocal results. 4 While some meta-analyses have determined panel interview validity to be as high as .44,5 others have found it to be a dismal -.04. 6 In fact, one meta-analysis reported different results depending on the studies utilized. 7 Furthermore, while a number of narrative reviews have been conducted on inter views as a selection device, it is quite surprising that no review, to date, has focused exclusively on the panel interview. Most of the past research has focused either on the individual versus the panel interview 8 or on the interview versus other selection devices? Thus, while others have offered advice to the practitioner concerning the use of the panel interview 10 they have based their suggestions on reviews of mixed types of interviews or on an...

A Review and Critique of Partner Effect Research in Small Groups

“…First, the task or problem requires a group-level choice, though the range of choices might be evident prior to or develops during discussion. An example of the former is a panel interview of job candidates (Dixon, Wang, Calvin, Dineen, & Tomlinson, 2002), and the latter a product design (Carletta, 2007). Second, members develop a preference for one of the potential solutions prior to or during group discussion.…”

The Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) for student selection in health professions training – A systematic review

“…Furthermore, interviewer and interviewee characteristics may represent a complex mix of factors that could have a major impact on the interview process hence reducing the validity and reliability of student selection. For example, Dixon et al (2002), in their review on the panel interview commented that structure and scoring anchors impact on its reliability and validity. Wilkinson et al (2008), in their study argued that panel interviews have little predictive value and added that the ''threat'' of an interview may even dissuade some potential applicants and concluded that GPA (grade point average from student pre entry qualification) has the best predictive value to academic performance.…”

The Influence of Relational Demography on Panel Interview Ratings: A Field Experiment

“…Employment interviews are one of the most frequently used methods of selection in both private and public sector organizations. Although the validity of some interviewing practices has been questioned, panel or board interviews are often recommended for selecting personnel (e.g., Arvey & Campion, 1982; Campion, Pursell, & Brown, 1988; Dixon, Wang, Calvin, Dineen, & Tomlinson, 2002; Roth & Campion, 1992; Wiesner & Cronshaw, 1988). Although prior research has addressed the effects of demographic variables in employment interviews (see Cesare, 1996 and Harris, 1989 for reviews), these investigations have typically examined one or more demographic variables (e.g., race, gender, age) of the interviewer and/or interviewee to see how they may influence the outcome of the interview, and unstructured and single interviewer conditions have been the primary conditions for these studies.…”

“…In addition, in the Prewett‐Livingston et al study, each panel interviewed different candidates, which introduces another potential source of variability. For this reason, then, Dixon et al (2002, p. 419) argued that racial dynamics in the context of panel interviews is an area that “deserves more research attention.”…”