Trying to understand the different pieces of the construct validity puzzle of assessment centers: an examination of assessor and assessee effects.
This study examined the effects of assessor-related factors (i.e., type of assessor) and assessee-related factors (i.e., type of assessee profile) on the construct validity of assessment center ratings. In particular, 3 types of assessors (26 industrial/organizational [I/O] psychologists, 20 managers, and 27 students), rated assessee performances that varied according to cross-exercise consistency (i.e., relatively inconsistent vs. relatively consistent) and dimension differentiation (relatively undifferentiated vs. relatively differentiated). Construct validity evidence was established for only one assessee profile and only in the I/O psychologist and managerial samples. More generally, these results indicate that 3 factors (poor design, assessor unreliability, and especially cross-situational inconsistent assessee performances) may explain why construct validity evidence is often not established in operational assessment centers.
Department of Personnel Management and Work and Organizational Psychology, Ghent University, Belgium. filip.lievens@rug.ac.be
Filip
F
Lievens
D000328:Adult; D004650:Employee Performance Appraisal; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D015588:Observer Variation; D010552:Personality Assessment; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D013647:Task Performance and Analysis