380 Industrial-Organizational Psychology
Psychological Association, 1954) and theEthical Principles
of Psychologists (American Psychological Association,
1953). Antidiscrimination legislation, executive orders, and
agency regulations ensued in the 1960s. Specifically, the
Civil Rights Act (CRA) of 1964, Title VII, prohibited dis-
crimination in employment because of race, color, religion,
sex, or national origin (Gutman, 2000). In 1972, the CRA
was amended to include educational institutions and state
and federal agencies (Gutman, 2000).
During the 1970s, the social and legal emphasis was on en-
suring that employers did not blatantly discriminate against
minorities and women. In 1971, in the case ofGriggs v. Duke
Power Co.(1971), the Supreme Court ruled that selection
devices must be job-related. Arvey (1979) noted that this
ruling “opened the door for statistical methods in reviewing
the consequential effects of employment practices” (p. 68).
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance reacted by is-
suing guidelines that included validation standards defined by
the American Psychological Association. Three key standards
documents were written:Uniform Guidelines on Employee
Selection Procedures(1978),Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testing(American Educational Research As-
sociation, American Psychological Association, & National
Council on Measurement in Education, 1999), andPrinciples
for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures
(Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc.,
1987). Other legislation was subsequently passed to address
discrimination based on age, gender, service in the Vietnam
War, disability, and others (Barrett, 1996).
It was much harder for an aggrieved party to sue and win
in the 1980s (Potter, 1989), which resulted in a succession of
changes in the legal climate. I-O activities associated with
fair employment practices generally declined because of less
aggressive enforcement. Interests in test fairness and fair em-
ployment practices were renewed, however, with the passage
of the American with Disabilities Act in 1990 and the Civil
Rights Act of 1991, along with a continued increase in the
number of lawsuits in the United States. The first executive
order of the twenty-first century, issued by President Bill
Clinton, forbids federal departments and agencies from dis-
criminating in personnel decisions based on protected genetic
information. Legislation was presented to implement similar
protections in private organizations (Fox, 2000).
The legal requirements that emerged during the past
40 years and the increase in the number of lawsuits in the
1980s and 1990s contributed to the rapid growth of I-O psy-
chology during these decades. Tenopyr (1992) noted that the
civil-rights movement and criticisms of employee selection
tools significantly advanced research in I-O psychology.
Science and scientific practices were reinforced, developed,
and further refined (Lowenberg & Conrad, 1998). When
asked to identify influences and related developments in the
field, SIOP past president (1999–2000) Angelo S. DeNisi
commented,Without a doubt I would include the passage of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964. Before this Act, I/O psychologists were interested
in test validity, but their interest was a scientific one, not a legal
one. The CRA began a tidal wave of work on test validation, be-
ginning with discussion of criterion issues, and culminating in
the work on validity generalization and utility. Once we realized
how important it was to be able to validate tests, the race was on
to discover factors that led to lower than desired validities, and
ways to validate tests more efficiently. This was really the impe-
tus behind the VG [validity generalization] research program.
Eventually, the line of research led to more serious discussions
of intelligence and intelligence tests (i.e., the role of “g”);
searches for alternatives to intelligence tests (e.g., research on
the Big 5 Personality Factors); and research on alternative
methods for delivering tests. (Angelo S. DeNisi, personal
communication, August 15, 2000)The emphasis on validity led to further development of
meta-analysis, refinement of job analysis methods, and re-
search on legally defensible performance appraisal systems.
In addition, a new employment opportunity for I-O psychol-
ogists emerged: as expert witnesses in court. Other legisla-
tion, court cases, and congressional hearings have influenced
I-O psychology research and practice. For example, the
Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice
Clarence Thomas, marked by accusations by Anita Hill that
he had sexually harassed her, stimulated research on sexual
harassment in organizations, and the Occupational Safety and
Health Act, instituted in 1971, raised awareness about safety
and health issues in the workplace.
Although many I-O psychologists believe that legislation
positively impacted the evolution of I-O psychology science
and practice, some colleagues believe that legal forces inhib-
ited the discipline’s growth. Guion, for example, stated that
the Civil Rights Act constrained selection research and prac-
tice (Locke, 2000). Further discussion of legal forces is neces-
sary to better understand the legal context of I-O psychology’s
history.Military ForcesThe two world wars provided occasions for psychologists to
demonstrate psychology’s value to society during times when
skepticism about the science existed (e.g., Capshew, 1999;
Hill, 1955; von Mayrhauser, 1987). During both wars, the