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.

[1]  George C. Thornton,et al.  Number of assessment center dimensions as a determinant of assessor accuracy. , 1989 .

[2]  Gerald V. Barrett,et al.  Validity of Personnel Decisions: A Conceptual Analysis of the Inferential and Evidential Bases , 1989 .

[3]  C. Russell.  Person Characteristic Versus Role Congruency Explanations for Assessment Center Ratings , 1987 .

[4]  Ivan T. Robertson,et al.  The psychometric properties and design of managerial assessment centres: Dimensions into exercises won't go , 1987 .

[5]  George C. Thornton,et al.  Meta-analysis of assessment center validity. , 1987 .

[6]  P. Bycio,et al.  Situational specificity in assessment center ratings: A confirmatory factor analysis. , 1987 .

[7]  Richard J. Klimoski,et al.  WHY DO ASSESSMENT CENTERS WORK? THE PUZZLE OF ASSESSMENT CENTER VALIDITY , 1987 .

[8]  Paul R. Sackett,et al.  ASSESSMENT CENTERS AND CONTENT VALIDITY: SOME NEGLECTED ISSUES , 1987 .

[9]  A. Dalessio,et al.  INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT CENTER METHODS ON ASSESSORS’RATINGS , 1986 .

[10]  P. Herriot,et al.  Group decision making in an assessment centre , 1985 .

[11]  P. Herriot,et al.  The predictive validity of pre‐ and post‐discussion assessment centre ratings , 1985 .

[12]  Michael P. Kirsch,et al.  METAANALYSES OF VALIDITY STUDIES PUBLISHED BETWEEN 1964 AND 1982 AND THE INVESTIGATION OF STUDY CHARACTERISTICS , 1984 .

[13]  Janet J. Turnage,et al.  Transsituational variability in human performance within assessment centers , 1982 .

[14]  Paul R. Sackett,et al.  Constructs and assessment center dimensions: Some troubling empirical findings , 1982 .

[15]  P. Sackett,et al.  Some Problems with Applying Content Validity Evidence to Assessment Center Procedures , 1981 .

[16]  W. Sonnenstuhl,et al.  EAPs: The Why's and How's of Planning Them. , 1980 .

[17]  M. Hakel,et al.  Temporal stability and individual differences in using assessment information to form overall ratings , 1979 .

[18]  R. Klimoski,et al.  ASSESSMENT CENTERS—VALID OR MERELY PRESCIENT , 1977 .

[19]  Mary L. Tenopyr,et al.  CONTENT?CONSTRUCT CONFUSION , 1977 .

[20]  P. C. Smith,et al.  Retranslation of expectations: An approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. , 1963 .

[21]  Richard R. Reilly,et al.  An investigation of the validity of expert true score estimates in appraisal research , 1989 .