VALIDITY AND FAIRNESS OF SOME ALTERNATIVE EMPLOYEE SELECTION PROCEDURES1
回顾八类替代性选拔程序（如传记资料、同行评价等）的有效性、不利影响和公平性，发现只有传记资料和同行评价的有效性接近标准化测试，但无证据表明它们能同时降低不利影响。
Despite extensive evidence that tests are valid for employee selection, Federal Guidelines have urged employers to seek alternative selection procedures that are equally valid but have less adverse impact on minorities. Research on the validity, adverse impact and fairness of eight categories of alternatives was reviewed. Feasibility of operational use of each type of alternative in an employment setting was also discussed. Only biodata and peer evaluation were supported as having validities substantially equal to those for standardized tests. Previous reviews and more recent research indicated that interviews, self‐assessments, reference checks, academic achievement, expert judgment and projective techniques had levels of validity generally below those reported for tests. Data, where available, offered no clear indication that any of the alternatives met the criterion of having equal validity with less adverse impact. Results are discussed and several additional promising alternatives are described.