Fairness in Personnel Selection: A Meta-Analysis and Policy Implications

Joseph J Martocchio, Ellen M. Whitener

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Previous research has suggestE, d that selection procE, dures and performance evaluations are not unfair to minorities. Results of a meta-analysis indicatE, d that Whites performE, d higher than non-Whites on cognitive ability tests (d =.464) and on supervisory ratings (d =.284), but not on objective results (d = -.009) and that validities between the tests and ratings and results were not significantly different. In addition, a comparison of prE, dictE, d to actual mean standardizE, d criterion differences between White and non-White subgroups suggestE, d that cognitive ability underprE, dictE, d actual differences in supervisory ratings. These results imply that researchers and policymakers neE, d to continue to evaluate fairness in testing and performance evaluation because, contrary to prior evidence, the use of cognitive ability tests may indeE, d be unfair to non-Whites.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)489-506
Number of pages18
JournalHuman Relations
Issue number5
StatePublished - May 1992


  • fairness
  • personnel selection
  • test bias

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • General Social Sciences
  • Strategy and Management
  • Management of Technology and Innovation


Dive into the research topics of 'Fairness in Personnel Selection: A Meta-Analysis and Policy Implications'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this