In research on adverse impact reduction (i.e., improving racial equality in hiring rates), one approach that is routinely mentioned in classic reviews is criterion weighting, or assigning more relative weight to contextual performance in the criterion measure. We revisit this recommendation, using an updated meta-analytic correlation matrix among predictors and criteria. Results show that, contrary to past beliefs, assigning more weight to contextual performance is typically unlikely to improve diversity, and is also often likely to harm criterion validity. Further, Pareto-optimal solutions show that, when holding criterion validity constant, assigning more criterion weight to contextual performance is likely to exacerbate rather than reduce adverse impact.
