Publication Type

Journal Article

Version

submittedVersion

Publication Date

12-2012

Abstract

Selection into medical education and training is a high-stakes process. A key unanswered issue is the effectiveness of measuring noncognitive predictors via both low-fidelity and high-fidelity selection approaches in this high-stakes context. We review studies investigating the effectiveness of multiple selection instruments in terms of predictive validity, incremental validity, and applicant reactions in both entry-level and advanced-level medical selection. Our results show that the situational judgment test (SJT) is the best single predictor of performance, operationalized in multiple ways. In addition, the low-fidelity SJT has incremental predictive power over cognitively oriented tests, and high-fidelity assessment center (AC) exercises add incremental validity over the low-fidelity (and less costly) selection methods. Concerning applicant reactions, results show that overall, the selection system is positively received. However, the method with the highest predictive validity the SJT received comparatively lower face validity ratings which may present a justice dilemma for employers. Furthermore, various other stakeholders have a political interest in the selection methods used (e.g., government, the regulators and trade unions).

Discipline

Human Resources Management | Organizational Behavior and Theory

Research Areas

Organisational Behaviour and Human Resources

Publication

International Journal of Selection and Assessment

Volume

20

Issue

4

First Page

486

Last Page

496

ISSN

0965-075X

Identifier

10.1111/ijsa.12011

Publisher

Wiley: 24 months

Copyright Owner and License

Authors

Additional URL

https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12011

Download

Share

COinS