A. Acceptable types of validity studies. For the purposes of
satisfying these guidelines, users may rely upon criterion-related
validity studies, content validity studies or construct validity
studies, in accordance with the standards set forth in the technical
standards of these guidelines, section 14 of
this part. New strategies for showing the validity of selection
procedures will be evaluated as they become accepted by the
psychological profession.
B. Criterion-related, content, and construct validity. Evidence of
the validity of a test or other selection procedure by a criterion-
related validity study should consist of empirical data demonstrating
that the selection procedure is predictive of or significantly
correlated with important elements of job performance. See 14B of this
part. Evidence of the validity of a test or other selection procedure by
a content validity study should consist of data showing that the content
of the selection procedure is representative of important aspects of
performance on the job for which the candidates are to be evaluated. See
14C of this part. Evidence of the validity of a test or other selection
procedure through a construct validity study should consist of data
showing that the procedure measures the degree to which candidates have
identifiable characteristics which have been determined to be important
in successful performance in the job for which the candidates are to be
evaluated. See section 14D of this part.
C. Guidelines are consistent with professional standards. The
provisions of these guidelines relating to validation of selection
procedures are intended to be consistent with generally accepted
professional standards for evaluating standardized tests and other
selection procedures, such as those described in the Standards for
Educational and Psychological Tests prepared by a joint committee of the
American Psychological Association, the American Educational Research
Association, and the National Council on Measurement in Education
(American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., 1974)
(hereinafter ``A.P.A. Standards'') and standard textbooks and journals
in the field of personnel selection.
D. Need for documentation of validity. For any selection procedure
which is part of a selection process which has an adverse impact and
which selection procedure has an adverse impact, each user should
maintain and have available such documentation as is described in
section 15 of this part.
E. Accuracy and standardization. Validity studies should be carried
out under conditions which assure insofar as possible the adequacy and
accuracy of the research and the report. Selection procedures should be
administered and scored under standardized conditions.
F. Caution against selection on basis of knowledges, skills, or
ability learned in brief orientation period. In general, users should
avoid making employment decisions on the basis of measures of
knowledges, skills, or abilities which are normally learned in a brief
orientation period, and which have an adverse impact.
G. Method of use of selection procedures. The evidence of both the
validity and utility of a selection procedure should support the method
the user chooses for operational use of the procedure, if that method of
use has a greater adverse impact than another method of use. Evidence
which may be sufficient to support the use of a selection procedure on a
pass/fail (screening) basis may be insufficient to support the use of
the same procedure on a ranking basis under these guidelines. Thus, if a
user decides to use a selection procedure on a ranking basis, and that
method of use has a greater adverse impact than use on an appropriate
pass/fail basis (see section 5H of this section), the user should have
sufficient evidence of validity and utility to support the use on a
ranking basis. See sections 3B, 14B (5) and (6), and 14C (8) and (9).
H. Cutoff scores. Where cutoff scores are used, they should normally
be set so as to be reasonable and consistent with normal expectations of
acceptable proficiency within the work force. Where applicants are
ranked on the basis of properly validated selection procedures and those
applicants scoring below a higher cutoff score than appropriate in light
of such expectations have little or no chance of being selected for
employment, the higher cutoff score may be appropriate, but the degree
of adverse impact should be considered.
I. Use of selection procedures for higher level jobs. If job
progression structures are so established that employees will probably,
within a reasonable period of
time and in a majority of cases, progress to a higher level, it may be
considered that the applicants are being evaluated for a job or jobs at
the higher level. However, where job progression is not so nearly
automatic, or the time span is such that higher level jobs or employees'
potential may be expected to change in significant ways, it should be
considered that applicants are being evaluated for a job at or near the
entry level. A ``reasonable period of time'' will vary for different
jobs and employment situations but will seldom be more than 5 years. Use
of selection procedures to evaluate applicants for a higher level job
would not be appropriate:
(1) If the majority of those remaining employed do not progress to
the higher level job;
(2) If there is a reason to doubt that the higher level job will
continue to require essentially similar skills during the progression
period; or
(3) If the selection procedures measure knowledges, skills, or
abilities required for advancement which would be expected to develop
principally from the training or experience on the job.
J. Interim use of selection procedures. Users may continue the use
of a selection procedure which is not at the moment fully supported by
the required evidence of validity, provided: (1) The user has available
substantial evidence of validity, and (2) the user has in progress, when
technically feasible, a study which is designed to produce the
additional evidence required by these guidelines within a reasonable
time. If such a study is not technically feasible, see section 6B. If
the study does not demonstrate validity, this provision of these
guidelines for interim use shall not constitute a defense in any action,
nor shall it relieve the user of any obligations arising under Federal
law.
K. Review of validity studies for currency. Whenever validity has
been shown in accord with these guidelines for the use of a particular
selection procedure for a job or group of jobs, additional studies need
not be performed until such time as the validity study is subject to
review as provided in section 3B of this part. There are no absolutes in
the area of determining the currency of a validity study. All
circumstances concerning the study, including the validation strategy
used, and changes in the relevant labor market and the job should be
considered in the determination of when a validity study is outdated.
