Se. Maxwell et Rd. Arvey, THE SEARCH FOR PREDICTORS WITH HIGH VALIDITY AND LOW ADVERSE IMPACT -COMPATIBLE OR INCOMPATIBLE GOALS, Journal of applied psychology, 78(3), 1993, pp. 433-437
Many researchers and personnel selection specialists appear to believe
that validity must often be sacrificed to reduce adverse impact. This
belief may be bolstered by an interpretation of the Uniform Guideline
s on Employee Selection Procedures (Equal Employment Opportunity Commi
ssion, 1978) that alternative selection methods should be sought in an
effort to reduce adverse impact as long as the accompanying reduction
in validity is not too large.The authors show that, contrary to popul
ar belief, within the universe of fair tests (as defined by T. A. Clea
ry, 1968), the most valid selection method will necessarily produce th
e least adverse impact. Although a less valid selection method can hav
e less adverse impact than the most valid fair method, such an alterna
tive necessarily fails to meet Cleary's fairness criterion. Thus, for
fair tests, maximizing validity also minimizes adverse impact.