Abstract
Reliability of screening for selection for postgraduate training in clinical psychology was assessed by correlating ratings by four readers of the application papers. Correlations for the 128 applicants were reasonably high. Reliability of the interview procedure used with 29 of the shortlisted applicants was assessed by correlating ratings from four interviewers who worked in pairs. Those who interviewed together correlated significantly but other correlations were disappointingly low. It was shown also that the selection of preferred candidates from the total interviewed did not differ from chance. The results are discussed in terms of the quality of the candidates applying for training and of the reliability and validity of the selection procedure.