3 ms·
Yes, and even when applying those criteria the results still were far from great. They were at least better than random chance though.
by jghn 3y ago
Yes, and even when applying those criteria the results still were far from great. They were at least better than random chance though.
- Paul-Craft 3y agoHow good can the results possibly be when you have ~1 day with someone to assess how they'll be over the next year or 2?
- jghn 3y agoI agree. The person to whom I was replying seemed to be implying that interviews can provide good signal.
- jldugger 3y agoI mean, 70 percent is pretty good for a selection strategy. I wasn't aware H&S had published a followup and now I'm curious if it ever got a peer review, because their table contradicts some earlier work suggesting that structured works better than unstructured. It's also pretty keen to recommend Integrity tests which I think the authors play a role in studying. edit: I guess it's "operational validity" which maybe isn't "percent that did well later"?