Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:32:49.173Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why Situational Judgment Is a Missing Component in the Theory of SJTs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2016

Klaus G. Melchers  and
Martin Kleinmann
Klaus G. Melchers*
Affiliation:
Institut für Psychologie und Pädagogik, Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany
Martin Kleinmann
Affiliation:
Psychologisches Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Klaus G. Melchers, Institut für Psychologie und Pädagogik, Universität Ulm, Abteilung Arbeits- & Organisationspsychologie, Albert-Einstein-Allee 41, D-89069 Ulm, Germany. E-mail: klaus.melchers@uni-ulm.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In their focal article, Lievens and Motowidlo (2016) consider procedural knowledge about effective actions in work situations as the key component of their theory of situational judgment tests (SJTs). In our commentary we want to suggest that situational judgment should nevertheless not be neglected in such a theory.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 29 - 34
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2016 

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.)

References

Christian, M. S., Edwards, B. D., & Bradley, J. C. (2010). Situational judgment tests: Constructs assessed and a meta-analysis of their criterion-related validities. Personnel Psychology, 63, 83–117. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2009.01163.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingold, P. V., Kleinmann, M., König, C. J., & Melchers, K. G. (in press). Transparency of assessment centers: Lower criterion-related validity but greater opportunity to perform? Advance online publication. Personnel Psychology. doi:10.1111/peps.12105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingold, P. V., Kleinmann, M., König, C. J., Melchers, K. G., & Van Iddekinge, C. H. (2015). Why do situational interviews predict job performance? The role of interviewees’ ability to identify criteria. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30, 387–398. doi:10.1007/s10869-014-9368-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jansen, A., Melchers, K. G., Lievens, F., Kleinmann, M., Brändli, M., Fraefel, L., & König, C. J. (2013). Situation assessment as an ignored factor in the behavioral consistency paradigm underlying the validity of personnel selection procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 326–341. doi:10.1037/a0031257 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kleinmann, M., Ingold, P. V., Lievens, F., König, C. J., Melchers, K. G., & Jansen, A. (2011). A different look at why selection procedures work: The role of candidates’ ability to identify criteria. Organizational Psychology Review, 1, 128–146. doi:10.1177/2041386610387000 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krumm, S., Lievens, F., Hüffmeier, J., Lipnevich, A. A., Bendels, H., & Hertel, G. (2015). How “situational” is judgment in situational judgment tests? Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 399–416. doi:10.1037/a0037674 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lance, C. E. (2008). Why assessment centers do not work the way they are supposed to. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 84–97. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.00017.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lievens, F., & Motowidlo, S. J. (2016). Situational judgment tests: From measures of situational judgment to measures of general domain knowledge. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 9, 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macan, T. (2009). The employment interview: A review of current studies and directions for future research. Human Resource Management Review, 19, 203–218. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.03.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maurer, S. D., Sue-Chan, C., & Latham, G. P. (1999). The situational interview. In Eder, R. W. & Harris, M. M. (Eds.), The employment interview handbook (pp. 159–177). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melchers, K. G., Klehe, U.-C., Richter, G. M., Kleinmann, M., König, C. J., & Lievens, F. (2009). “I know what you want to know”: The impact of interviewees’ ability to identify criteria on interview performance and construct-related validity. Human Performance, 22, 355–374. doi:10.1080/08959280903120295 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mischel, W. (1973). Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality. Psychological Review, 80, 252–283. doi:10.1037/h0035002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oostrom, J. K., Melchers, K. G., Ingold, P. V., & Kleinmann, M. (in press). Why do situational interviews predict performance? Is it saying how you would behave or knowing how you should behave? Advance online publication. Journal of Business and Psychology. doi:10.1007/s10869-015-9410-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rockstuhl, T., Ang, S., Ng, K.-Y., Lievens, F., & Van Dyne, L. (2015). Putting judging situations into situational judgment tests: Evidence from intercultural multimedia SJTs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 464–480. doi:10.1037/a0038098 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Speer, A. B., Christiansen, N. D., Melchers, K. G., König, C. J., & Kleinmann, M. (2014). Establishing the cross-situational convergence of the ability to identify criteria: Consistency and prediction across similar and dissimilar assessment center exercises. Human Performance, 27, 44–60. doi:10.1080/08959285.2013.854364 CrossRefGoogle Scholar