Department of Psychology, School of the Biological Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Med Educ. 2012 Sep;46(9):850-68. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04336.x.
This paper presents a systematic review of the emerging international research evidence for the use of situational judgement tests (SJTs) for testing important non-academic attributes (such as empathy, integrity and resilience) in selection processes.
Several databases (e.g. MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were searched to retrieve empirical studies relating to SJTs published between 1990 and 2010. Personal contact with experts in the field was made to identify any unpublished research or work in progress to obtain the most current material. Finally, reference lists were checked to access other relevant journal articles and further research. All research studies were required to meet specific inclusion criteria selected by two independent reviewers.
Over 1000 citations were identified during the initial literature search; following the review of abstracts, full-text copies of 76 articles were retrieved and evaluated. A total of 39 articles that adequately met the inclusion criteria were included in the final review. The research evidence shows that, compared with personality and IQ tests, SJTs have good levels of reliability, predictive validity and incremental validity for testing a range of professional attributes, such as empathy and integrity.
SJTs can be designed to test a broad range of non-academic constructs depending on the selection context. As a relatively low-fidelity assessment, SJTs are a cost-efficient methodology compared with high-fidelity assessments of non-academic attributes, such as those used in objective structured clinical examinations. In general, SJTs are found to demonstrate less adverse impact than IQ tests and are positively received by candidates. Further research is required to explore theoretical developments and the underlying construct validity of SJTs.
本文系统综述了国际上新兴的使用情境判断测验(SJTs)来测试选拔过程中重要的非学术属性(如同理心、正直和适应力)的研究证据。
检索了多个数据库(如 MEDLINE、PsycINFO、Web of Science),以获取 1990 年至 2010 年间发表的与 SJTs 相关的实证研究。与该领域的专家进行了个人联系,以确定任何未发表的研究或正在进行的工作,以获取最新的材料。最后,检查了参考文献以获取其他相关的期刊文章和进一步的研究。所有研究都必须符合两位独立评审员选择的具体纳入标准。
在最初的文献搜索中,确定了 1000 多个引用;在审查了摘要之后,检索并评估了 76 篇全文文章。共有 39 篇文章充分满足纳入标准,被纳入最终综述。研究证据表明,与人格和智商测试相比,SJTs 在测试一系列专业属性(如同理心和正直)方面具有较高的可靠性、预测效度和增量效度。
SJTs 可以根据选拔背景设计来测试广泛的非学术结构。作为一种相对低保真度的评估方法,与非学术属性的高保真度评估(如客观结构化临床考试中使用的评估)相比,SJTs 是一种具有成本效益的方法。一般来说,与智商测试相比,SJTs 被发现产生的不利影响较小,并且受到候选人的积极反馈。需要进一步研究来探索 SJTs 的理论发展和潜在的结构有效性。