Abstract
This study was designed to examine the content validity of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (D.O.T.) as applied to construction site workers in Hong Kong. The study was divided into the First Expert Panel Review, the Second Expert Panel Review and the Field Study. The results indicated that (i) 15 out of the 55 items of the D.O.T. were identified as insignificant job requirements, and 14 items other than those suggested by the D.O.T. were identified as significant job requirements by the First Expert Panel; (ii) criteria of 20 out of the 40 items of the job requirements as suggested by the D.O.T. were identified as different from the ones suggested by the Second Expert Panel; and (iii) criteria of 4 items were found to be different among the D.O.T., the Second Expert Panel and the Field Study. The results of this study substantiate the claim that the validity of the D.O.T. is questionable, and research on a larger scale should be implemented to further examine the validity of the D.O.T.