The specificity of the psychiatric interview

Hunt, William A.; Herrmann, Robert S.; Noble, Howard

doi:10.1002/1097-4679(195701)13:1<49::aid-jclp2270130111>3.0.co;2-3

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Psychiatric interviews were also omitted from this analysis when the interviewee was not a job applicant or employee. Examples of excluded studies include Matarazzo, Matarazzo, Saslow, and Phillips (1958) and Hunt, Herrmann, and Noble (1957), which involved psychiatric interviews conducted at mental hospitals.…”

Section: Decision Rulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The validity of employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis.

McDaniel¹,

Whetzel²,

Schmidt³

et al. 1994

Journal of Applied Psychology

580

567

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This meta-analytic review presents the findings of a project investigating the validity of the employment interview. Analyses are based on 245 coefficients derived from 86,311 individuals. Results show that interview validity depends on the content of the interview (situational, job related, or psychological), how the interview is conducted (structured vs. unstructured; board vs. individual), and the nature of the criterion (job performance, training performance, and tenure; research or administrative ratings). Situational interviews had higher validity than did job-related interviews, which, in turn, had higher validity than did psychologically based interviews. Structured interviews were found to have higher validity than unstructured interviews. Interviews showed similar validity for job performance and training performance criteria, but validity for the tenure criteria was lower.

show abstract

Section: Decision Rulesmentioning

confidence: 99%