Assessment Center Exercises Research Articles

Direct, indirect, and controlled observation and rating accuracy.

Videotaping of assessment center exercises has become an increasingly common practice, yet little is known about the impact of video technology on rating accuracy. This study compared ratings ofa group discussion made after live observation (direct), after viewing a video (indirect), or after viewing a video with opportunities to pause and rewind (controlled). Results indicated some differences in observational accuracy but not in rating accuracy. Implications for the use of video technology in assessment centers are discussed.

The Measurement of Assessment Center Situations: Bem's Template Matching Technique for Examining Exercise Similarity

The present study was concerned with investigating the nature of assessment center exercises. Bem and Funder's (1978) technique of classifying and comparing situations in behavioral terms was applied to the measurement of exercises in an assessment center with ratings reflecting exercise factors. Six assessors created templates for each of the four exercises. Intercorrelations between the mean template ratings suggested that the exercises were not viewed as similar situations. Moreover, some relationship was found between exercise similarity and performance consistency. It is proposed that these differences in exercise content may be responsible for the inability to find cross‐situational consistencies in candidate behavior in a typical assessment center. Practical implications and extensions of this study are discussed.

An exercise design approach to understanding assessment center dimension and exercise constructs.

An exercise design approach to understanding assessment center dimension and exercise constructs.

Social studies: Connecticut's Teacher Assessment Center exercises

Social studies: Connecticut's Teacher Assessment Center exercises

Reliability of exercise ratings in the leaderless group discussion

The demonstrated low correlations of dimension ratings across assessment centre exercises has led to reservations about their use. A proposed alternative is the use of overall exercise ratings that may represent total performance on work simulations. Three forms of reliability of such exercise ratings were studied in this laboratory experiment. The study design incorporated four groups of assessors and 31 participants in multiple Leadership Group Discussion (LGD) problems. (LGD was chosen because it is extensively used in assessment centres.) Inter‐rater reliability, as measured by intra‐class correlations within an assessor group, ranged from .69 to .99. Intergroup reliability, as measured by correlations of consensus ratings between assessor groups that had observed identical LGD groups, was .66 to .84. Alternate form reliability, as measured by correlations of overall ratings by the same assessor of participants in two different LGD problems, was .35 to .62. The implications of these findings for the use of overall exercise ratings are discussed.

AN EXAMINATION OF THE EFFECTS OF USING BEHAVIOR CHECKLISTS ON THE CONSTRUCT VALIDITY OF ASSESSMENT CENTER DIMENSIONS

Although research has established the criterion‐related validity of assessment centers for selection purposes, the construct validity of dimension ratings has not been demonstrated. A quasi‐experimental design was used to investigate the influence of retranslated behavior checklists on the construct validity of dimension ratings for two assessment center exercises. Assessor use of behavior checklists increased the average convergent (i.e., same dimension across exercise) validity from .24 to .43 while decreasing the average discriminant (i.e., different dimension within exercise) validity (.47 to .41). Behavior checklist sums were moderately correlated with corresponding dimension ratings and demonstrated a comparable level of construct validity. It is suggested that using behavior checklists may improve dimension construct validity by reducing the cognitive demands placed on raters.

Dollar-Value Utility of Alternative Procedures for Selecting School Principals

This paper evaluates four selection procedures for hiring school principals. These procedures (interviews, assessment center, selected assessment center exercises, and paper and pencil inventories) were compared in terms of validity, processing costs, and dollar gain expected from implementation. Using a pool of 115 individuals who applied for 7 principal positions, the selected assessment center exercises had the greatest utility with an expected dollar-value performance gain in excess of $58,000 over the traditional interview alternative. Use of utility analyses highlights the economic impact staffing procedures have on the educational organization.

Multiple assessment center exercises and job relatedness.

Multiple assessment center exercises and job relatedness.

Multiple assessment center exercises and job relatedness.

Multiple assessment center exercises and job relatedness.

The Effect of Age, Departmental Experience and Prior Rater Experience on Performance in Assessment Center Exercises

The article discusses two studies which investigated the effect of age, departmental experience and prior rater experience on performance in assessment center exercises. The first study found that ...

THE EFFECT OF AGE, DEPARTMENTAL EXPERIENCE AND PRIOR RATER EXPERIENCE ON PERFORMANCE IN ASSESSMENT CENTER EXERCISES.

The article discusses two studies which investigated the effect of age, departmental experience and prior rater experience on performance in assessment center exercises. The first study found that ...