Assessment Center Exercise Factors Represent Cross-Situational Specificity, Not Method Bias

By C. Lance, William H. Newbolt, R. Gatewood, M. Foster, Nita R. French, David E. Smith. 2000

94 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Management Science and Operations Research, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2bafaaab9d982134e520295880d3fd9a84edf959

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Assessment Center Dimensions: A Conceptual and Empirical Reexamination of the Assessment Center Construct-Related Validity Paradox (2000, methodology): “Second, assessment centers may be measuring constructs other than those originally intended by the JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, VOL. 26, NO. 4, 2000 assessment center designers (Lance et al., 1998; Raymark & Binning, 1997; Russell & Domm, 1995).”
Method Variance in Organizational Research (2006, background): “…or job performance ratings), are less criticized for the same shortcoming, although some have noted that source bias can be a problem in these other domains (e.g., Lance, Baxter, & Mahan, 2005; Lance et al., 2000, although they question whether “source bias” is really due to method variance).”
A SITUATIONAL JUDGMENT TEST OF PERSONAL INITIATIVE AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO PERFORMANCE (2009, background): “Lance et al. (2000) demonstrated that exercise factors (i.e. situational factors) are a valid source of variance in applicants’ performance rather than a source of systematic error variance.”
Why Assessment Centers Do Not Work the Way They Are Supposed To (2008, methodology): “The findings of Lance and colleagues (Lance et al., 2000; Lance, Foster, et al., 2004; Lance et al., 2007) from six different ACs strongly supported the situational specificity interpretation Figure 1.”
Personnel selection. (2008, background): “Third, various studies (Lance et al. 2000, Lievens 2002) identified the nature of candidate performance as another key factor.”
The Construct-Related Validity of Assessment Center Ratings: A Review and Meta-Analysis of the Role of Methodological Factors (2003, background): “They argue that the exercise factors that typically emerge represent valid cross-situational specificity and not “method bias” (Ladd, Atchley, Gniatczyk & Bauman, 2002; Lance et al., 2000).”
Method Effects, Measurement Error, and Substantive Conclusions (2010, background): “Now, however, these exercise effects are more properly understood as representing crosssituational specificity in AC performance not method bias (Lance, 2008a, 2008b; Lance et al., 2000).”