Validity generalization: Some critical remarks on the Schmidt‐Hunter procedure*

Abstract

This article presents some critical comments on the validity generalization procedure which has been presented by Schmidt, Hunter and others. They have put forward a method for testing the hypothesis that the variance in validity coefficients across situations for job‐test combinations is due to what they consider to be statistical artifacts. The Schmidt‐Hunter approach is criticized on the following points: the compilation of validity data, the use of criterion measures, and the test of the hypothesis of no situational specificity. Further, the relation between the concepts ‘situational specificity’ and ‘validity generalization’ is considered. In addition, it is noted that Schmidt, Hunter and others have defined the concept ‘situation’ in a different way than classical writers. It is concluded that the Schmidt‐Hunter approach to validity generalization shows fundamental shortcomings. As a consequence their far‐reaching conclusions for the practice of personnel selection should be considered premature.