Lievens Filip, Sackett Paul R
Department of Personnel Management and Work and Organizational Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
J Appl Psychol. 2006 Sep;91(5):1181-8. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.1181.
In this study, the authors examined whether video-based situational judgment tests (SJTs) have higher predictive validity than written SJTs (keeping verbal content constant). The samples consisted of 1,159 students who completed a video-based version of an SJT and 1,750 students who completed the same SJT in a written format. The study was conducted in a high stakes testing context. The video-based version of an interpersonally oriented SJT had a lower correlation with cognitive ability than did the written version. It also had higher predictive and incremental validity for predicting interpersonally oriented criteria than did the written version. In this high stakes context, applicants also reacted relatively favorably to the SJTs, although there was no significant difference in face validity between the formats. These findings suggest that SJT format changes be made with caution and that validation evidence is needed when changes are proposed.
在本研究中，作者检验了基于视频的情境判断测验（SJTs）是否比书面SJTs具有更高的预测效度（保持语言内容不变）。样本包括1159名完成基于视频版SJT的学生和1750名完成相同书面形式SJT的学生。该研究在高风险测试环境中进行。人际导向型SJT的视频版与认知能力的相关性低于书面版。在预测人际导向型标准方面，它也比书面版具有更高的预测效度和增量效度。在这种高风险环境下，尽管两种形式在表面效度上没有显著差异，但申请人对SJTs的反应相对较好。这些发现表明，SJT形式的改变应谨慎进行，并且在提出改变时需要验证证据。
