• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

候选人的反应与工作表现有关吗?或者会影响效标关联效度?对反应、选拔测试分数和工作表现之间关系的多项研究调查。

Do candidate reactions relate to job performance or affect criterion-related validity? A multistudy investigation of relations among reactions, selection test scores, and job performance.

机构信息

Department of Management, University of Toronto-Scarborough.

出版信息

J Appl Psychol. 2013 Sep;98(5):701-19. doi: 10.1037/a0034089. Epub 2013 Aug 12.

DOI:10.1037/a0034089
PMID:23937298
Abstract

Considerable evidence suggests that how candidates react to selection procedures can affect their test performance and their attitudes toward the hiring organization (e.g., recommending the firm to others). However, very few studies of candidate reactions have examined one of the outcomes organizations care most about: job performance. We attempt to address this gap by developing and testing a conceptual framework that delineates whether and how candidate reactions might influence job performance. We accomplish this objective using data from 4 studies (total N = 6,480), 6 selection procedures (personality tests, job knowledge tests, cognitive ability tests, work samples, situational judgment tests, and a selection inventory), 5 key candidate reactions (anxiety, motivation, belief in tests, self-efficacy, and procedural justice), 2 contexts (industry and education), 3 continents (North America, South America, and Europe), 2 study designs (predictive and concurrent), and 4 occupational areas (medical, sales, customer service, and technological). Consistent with previous research, candidate reactions were related to test scores, and test scores were related to job performance. Further, there was some evidence that reactions affected performance indirectly through their influence on test scores. Finally, in no cases did candidate reactions affect the prediction of job performance by increasing or decreasing the criterion-related validity of test scores. Implications of these findings and avenues for future research are discussed.

摘要

大量证据表明,候选人对选拔程序的反应方式会影响他们的测试表现和对招聘组织的态度(例如,向他人推荐公司)。然而,很少有研究候选人反应的研究关注组织最关心的结果之一:工作绩效。我们试图通过开发和测试一个概念框架来解决这一差距,该框架阐述了候选人的反应方式是否以及如何影响工作绩效。我们使用来自 4 项研究(总 N = 6480)的数据来实现这一目标,这些研究涉及 6 种选拔程序(人格测试、工作知识测试、认知能力测试、工作样本、情景判断测试和选拔清单)、5 种关键候选人反应(焦虑、动机、对测试的信任、自我效能和程序公正)、2 种背景(行业和教育)、3 个大洲(北美、南美和欧洲)、2 种研究设计(预测性和同期性)以及 4 个职业领域(医疗、销售、客户服务和技术)。与之前的研究一致,候选人的反应与测试成绩相关,而测试成绩与工作绩效相关。此外,有一些证据表明,反应通过对测试成绩的影响间接影响绩效。最后,在任何情况下,候选人的反应都没有通过增加或减少测试成绩的效标关联效度来影响工作绩效的预测。讨论了这些发现的意义和未来研究的方向。

相似文献

1
Do candidate reactions relate to job performance or affect criterion-related validity? A multistudy investigation of relations among reactions, selection test scores, and job performance.候选人的反应与工作表现有关吗?或者会影响效标关联效度?对反应、选拔测试分数和工作表现之间关系的多项研究调查。
J Appl Psychol. 2013 Sep;98(5):701-19. doi: 10.1037/a0034089. Epub 2013 Aug 12.
2
The validity and incremental validity of knowledge tests, low-fidelity simulations, and high-fidelity simulations for predicting job performance in advanced-level high-stakes selection.在高级高风险选拔中,知识测试、低保真模拟和高保真模拟预测工作绩效的有效性和增量有效性。
J Appl Psychol. 2011 Sep;96(5):927-40. doi: 10.1037/a0023496.
3
Evaluating cognitive ability, knowledge tests and situational judgement tests for postgraduate selection.评估认知能力、知识测试和情景判断测试在研究生选拔中的应用。
Med Educ. 2012 Apr;46(4):399-408. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04195.x.
4
The effects of response instructions on situational judgment test performance and validity in a high-stakes context.在高风险情境下,反应指令对情境判断测验成绩及效度的影响。
J Appl Psychol. 2009 Jul;94(4):1095-101. doi: 10.1037/a0014628.
5
Can I retake it? Exploring subgroup differences and criterion-related validity in promotion retesting.可以重考吗?晋升重测中的亚组差异和效标关联效度探索
J Appl Psychol. 2011 Sep;96(5):941-55. doi: 10.1037/a0023562.
6
Reconsidering vocational interests for personnel selection: the validity of an interest-based selection test in relation to job knowledge, job performance, and continuance intentions.重新思考人员选拔中的职业兴趣:基于兴趣的选拔测试与工作知识、工作绩效和留职意愿的关系的有效性。
J Appl Psychol. 2011 Jan;96(1):13-33. doi: 10.1037/a0021193.
7
Situational judgment tests as a new tool for dental student selection.情境判断测试作为一种新的牙科学生选拔工具。
J Dent Educ. 2011 Jun;75(6):743-9.
8
Positive manifold limits the relevance of content-matching strategies for validating selection test batteries.积极流形限制了内容匹配策略在验证选拔测试组合方面的相关性。
J Appl Psychol. 2009 Jul;94(4):1018-31. doi: 10.1037/a0014075.
9
The honeymoon effect in job performance: temporal increases in the predictive power of achievement motivation.工作绩效中的蜜月效应:成就动机预测力的暂时性提升。
J Appl Psychol. 1986;71(2):185-8.
10
Situational judgement tests in medical education and training: Research, theory and practice: AMEE Guide No. 100.医学教育与培训中的情境判断测试:研究、理论与实践:AMEE指南第100号
Med Teach. 2016;38(1):3-17. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2015.1072619. Epub 2015 Aug 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Are serious games an alternative to traditional personality questionnaires? Initial analysis of a gamified assessment.严肃游戏能否替代传统的人格问卷?一种游戏化评估的初步分析。
PLoS One. 2024 May 2;19(5):e0302429. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302429. eCollection 2024.
2
An exploration of applicant perceptions of asynchronous video MMIs in medical selection.医学选拔中申请人对异步视频多迷你面试的认知探索。
MedEdPublish (2016). 2018 Dec 14;7:285. doi: 10.15694/mep.2018.0000285.1. eCollection 2018.
3
Evaluation of warning strategies to reduce faking during military recruitment.
评估在军事招募过程中减少伪装行为的警示策略。
Mil Psychol. 2024 Nov;36(6):606-616. doi: 10.1080/08995605.2023.2243364. Epub 2023 Aug 28.
4
Dear Computer on My Desk, Which Candidate Fits Best? An Assessment of Candidates' Perception of Assessment Quality When Using AI in Personnel Selection.亲爱的桌上电脑,哪位候选人最合适?对候选人在人员选拔中使用人工智能时对评估质量的认知的评估。
Front Psychol. 2021 Oct 21;12:739711. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.739711. eCollection 2021.
5
Objective and bias-free measures of candidate motivation during job applications.求职申请中候选人动机的客观且无偏见的衡量标准。
Sci Rep. 2021 Nov 9;11(1):21254. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-00659-y.
6
Applicant Personality and Procedural Justice Perceptions of Group Selection Interviews.群体选拔面试中申请人的个性与程序公平感
J Bus Psychol. 2016;31(4):569-582. doi: 10.1007/s10869-015-9430-9. Epub 2015 Dec 23.