Publication Type

Journal Article

Publication Date

8-2002

Abstract

This study examined the effects of assessor-related factors (i.e., type of assessor) and assessee-related factors (i.e., type of assessee profile) on the construct validity of assessment center ratings. In particular, 3 types of assessors (26 industrial/organizational [I/O] psychologists, 20 managers, and 27 students), rated assessee performances that varied according to cross-exercise consistency (i.e., relatively inconsistent vs. relatively consistent) and dimension differentiation (relatively undifferentiated vs. relatively differentiated). Construct validity evidence was established for only one assessee profile and only in the I/O psychologist and managerial samples. More generally, these results indicate that 3 factors (poor design, assessor unreliability, and especially cross-situational inconsistent assessee performances) may explain why construct validity evidence is often not established in operational assessment centers.

Discipline

Industrial and Organizational Psychology | Organizational Behavior and Theory

Research Areas

Organisational Behaviour and Human Resources

Publication

Journal of Applied Psychology

Volume

87

Issue

4

First Page

675

Last Page

686

ISSN

0021-9010

Identifier

10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.675

Publisher

American Psychological Association

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Additional URL

https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.675

Share

COinS