Publication Type
Journal Article
Version
acceptedVersion
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
Citation
LIEVENS, Filip.
Trying to understand the different pieces of the construct validity puzzle of assessment centers: An examination of assessor and assessee effects. (2002). Journal of Applied Psychology. 87, (4), 675-686.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/5631
Copyright Owner and License
Authors
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Additional URL
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.675
Included in
Industrial and Organizational Psychology Commons, Organizational Behavior and Theory Commons