The utility gain of leaving professional judgment outside of prediction: Clinical versus mechanical interpretation of GMA and personality
(English)Manuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
Purpose – The purpose of this study was to analyze and illustrate the margin utility of using clinical versus mechanical data combination for personnel selection purposes using measures of personality and general mental ability as predictors of job performance.
Design/methodology/approach – By utilizing meta-analytic estimates for personality and general mental ability to predict job performance, and for clinical versus mechanical data combination predicting work criteria, utility analysis was applied to estimate the margin utility between data combination approach for different selection scenarios.
Findings – The findings indicate that in a selection context, the difference in financial outcome is likely to be extensive between the two data combination methods. The gain in utility of combining data mechanically corresponds to an amount likely to represent the difference between failure and success for many organizations.
Implications – This comparison provide professionals with the opportunity to gain insight into the difference in financial outcome of applying data combination method and by that increase the likelihood of acceptance and use of the mechanical approach. It also provides the reader with an example of how to utilize estimates provided by research, how to apply them for data combination purposes, and how to estimate the margin utility in their own selection practice.
Originality/value – This is the first study to illustrate the superiority of mechanical data combination compared to clinical for job performance and selection purposes in financial terms.
Utility, mechanical data combination, clinical data combination, personality, general mental ability, personnel selection, prediction, job performance
Research subject Psychology
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-101973OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-101973DiVA: diva2:706082