On the undervaluing of diversity in the validity–diversity tradeoff consideration

Sackett et al. (2023) provide a useful more practice-oriented discussion of Sackett et al. (2022) report that reexamined meta-analytic corrections for a wide variety of selection tools, across common content and process domains. We expand on their discussion of implications regarding the new validity estimates for the classic validity – diversity tradeoff by arguing that the benefits of diversity are still underestimated when assessing this tradeoff. To be fair, this issue is not limited to Sackett et al. ’ s efforts but rather represents a shortcoming of the field at large. Regardless, these limitations mean that if diversity benefits were better understood by the field and properly accounted for in tradeoff estimates, even greater reductions in the usefulness of predictors with high group mean differences would likely be observed. We make three key points. First, we argue that the benefits of group diversity are not included in selection decisions, leading to underestimations of diversity benefits. Second, we elaborate on the central role of interdependence as a condition that maximizes the importance of diversity. Finally, we connect these issues to the long-term implications of assessment decisions containing adverse impact.