Validation of a structured interview in the selection of the Lebanese Red Cross volunteers -

Abstract

Structured interviewing is a prominent method of assessment that has higher levels of predictive validity than other methods of assessment. Predictive validity however can only be established after the interview is developed and used to make high stakes decisions about candidates. Content validity, on the other hand, is a type of validity that can be done while the interview is being developed and before it is used to assess candidates. Although this method is used extensively by researchers and practitioners alike, the method for conducting it is unclear, making it seem less robust than other methods of validity. In this paper, we discuss the use of cognitive interviewing as a method of content validation of structured selection interviews. We do this by: 1) developing an interview protocol for selecting volunteers into the Lebanese Red Cross; and 2) pre-testing the questions on the protocol through cognitive interviewing technique. The results show that 19 out of the 20 questions developed needed revising, but for different reasons. Our analysis revealed six different reasons for amending the questions including: Missing details, Misleading situation, Misleading order of probes, Complex nature of competency, Misleading terminology, and Irrelevant details. This study reveals the importance of pre-testing selection interview questions and gives tips for constructing future questions and guidance on how to test these questions through the cognitive interviewing technique.