The use of aptitude tests in the selection of radio tube mounters.

Surgent, Louis Vincent

doi:10.1037/h0093559

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A more serious problem with the new utility model relates to the assumption that the observed predictor and criterion scores follow a bivariate normal distribution. Even though Schmidt et al (1979) mentioned the studies by Tiffin and Vincent (1960) and by Surgent (1947)—both of which substantiated the validity of the bivariate normal model to describe test–criterion sample data—the assumption may still be judged as questionable. Remember, however, that the main purpose of the distributional assumption is to enable the estimation of the utility before the selection actually takes place.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utility analysis for the one-cohort selection-retention decision with a probationary period.

Corte¹

1994

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides a method for estimating the utility of a choice between alternative predictors for selecting a single cohort of new employees when some of these employees are later judged to perform at an unacceptable level and are therefore dismissed at the end of the probationary period. The method is shown to apply to both the traditional selection utility situation, in which the objective is to obtain a fixed number of hires, and the situation in which the objective is to obtain a fixed number of employees who successfully survive the initial probationary period. The utility estimation method proposed applies J. W. Boudreau and C. J. Berger's (1985) conceptual model to a singlecohort probationary case and extends that model by providing an estimation method to predict the utility of alternative predictors before selection takes place. The limitations of the proposal as well as its relationship to recruitment and separation costs are also discussed. I thank William Whitely and two particularly helpful anonymous reviewers for their useful comments on a draft of the article.A computer program (written in FORTRAN 77) that performs the utility calculations described in this article is available on request. Because the program calls routines from the Numerical Algorithms Group library, interested readers should first check whether they have this library (or a similar one) at their disposal.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utility analysis for the one-cohort selection-retention decision with a probationary period.

Corte¹

1994

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Super (1,(217)(218)(219)(220), Tiffin and Asher (3) and Surgent (2), the Purdue Pegboiard promises to be valid for measuring armand-hand dexterity of a finer type than that measured by the Minnesota Rate of Manipulation Test. It also appears to be a valid measure of finger dexterity, more suitable for industrial selection than the O'Connor Finger and Tweezer Dexterity Tests.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A note on a modified Purdue Pegboard.

Bass¹,

Stucki²

1951

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Alternatively, in the light of the available evidence (e.g. Tiffin & Vincent, 1960;and Surgent, 1947), there is no compelling reason to drop the present distributional assumption. Nor should one forget that the main purpose of the assumption is to enable the estimation of the utility before the selection actually takes place.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Estimating and maximizing the utility of sequential selection decisions with a probationary period

Corte

1998

Brit J Math & Statis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides a double extension of the two‐stage sequential model developed by Cronbach & Gleser (1965) to estimate the utility of a single‐cohort personnel selection decision. The first extension generalizes the formulation of the two‐stage procedure to that of a general multi‐stage model, whereas the second addresses the situation in which some of the newly hired employees are later judged to perform at an unacceptable level and are therefore dismissed at the end of the training and probationary period. Thus, the new model and the corresponding computational procedure can be used to estimate the utility of selecting sequentially either a fixed quota of selectees (FQS) or a fixed quota of successful selectees (FQSS). In addition, the paper presents an efficient procedure to derive predictor cutoff scores that maximise the utility of the overall selection decision.

show abstract

The use of aptitude tests in the selection of radio tube mounters.

Cited by 7 publications

References 9 publications

Utility analysis for the one-cohort selection-retention decision with a probationary period.

Utility analysis for the one-cohort selection-retention decision with a probationary period.

A note on a modified Purdue Pegboard.

Estimating and maximizing the utility of sequential selection decisions with a probationary period

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About