Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-7vqc4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-08T06:14:33.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 21 - Twenty Questions about Employment Testing Bias and Unfairness in Sweden

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 November 2025

Winfred Arthur, Jr.
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Dennis Doverspike
Affiliation:
George Mason University
Benjamin D. Schulte
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Get access

Summary

This chapter explores bias and fairness in Swedish employment testing from legal, historical, and practical perspectives. Swedish labor laws, influenced by trade unions and the welfare state, emphasize non-discrimination under the Discrimination Act. The law prohibits bias based on sex, gender identity, ethnicity, religion, disability, sexual orientation, and age, and requires preventive action. It is enforced by the Equality Ombudsman and Labour Court. Although validity evidence is not explicitly required, selection decisions should be based on a job analysis. No proof of intent is required in discrimination claims, and the burden of proof is shared. Quotas are banned, but positive action is allowed for gender balance when qualifications are equal. Psychological test certification is voluntary in Sweden; the Psychological Association offers guidelines on validity, reliability, and fairness. However, these are not mandatory, and many employers develop their own policies. International standards offer best-practice guidance for fair assessments, including for emerging artificial intelligence tools.

Information

Type
Chapter

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Almond, P. (2002). Industrial relations and trade unions in Sweden. In Farnham, D. and Snodgrass, D. T. (eds.), Trade unions in renewal: A comparative study (pp. 101120). Routledge.Google Scholar
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education (AERA, APA, & NCME) (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. AERA, APA, & NCME.Google Scholar
Evers, A., Muñiz, J., Hagemeister, C., Hstmælingen, A., Lindley, P., Sjöberg, A., and Bartram, D. (2013). Assessing the quality of tests: Revision of the EFFA review model. Psicothema, 25(3), 283291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Parliament, Council of the European Union (2016). General Data Protection Regulation.Google Scholar
Gustafsson, J. E., and Balke, G. (1993). General and specific abilities as predictors of school achievement. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28(4), 407434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hirdman, Y. (1990). The gender system: Theoretical reflections and empirical evidence from Sweden. In Seidman, S. G. and Clark, D. (eds.), Beyond the closet: The transformation of gay and lesbian life (pp. 187200). Routledge.Google Scholar
International Organization for Standardization (2020). ISO 10667:2020 Assessment Service Delivery – Procedures and Methods to Assess People in Work and Organizational Settings. ISO.Google Scholar
International Test Commission (2001). International guidelines for test use. International Journal of Testing, 1(2), 93114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strömbäck Hjärne, M. (2020). A fair score? Group independent validity arguments for college admission tests (Publication No. 978-91-7855-401-0). Doctoral Dissertation, Umeå University. Department of Applied Educational Science. www.avhandlingar.se/avhandling/68de596f26/Google Scholar
Palme, J., and Svensson, I. (2007). Social policy and economic development in Sweden. In Forssbæck, J. and Oxelheim, L. (eds.), The Oxford handbook of economic and institutional transparency (pp. 477492). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×