Effects of Response Instructions on Faking a Situational Judgment Test

108 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Personnel selection. (2008, background): “In addition, more specific performance dimensions (e.g., citizenship, counterproductive work behavior) are better predicted by carefully selected measures that may be subfacets of broad Big Five traits (Hough & Oswald 2005, Ones et al. 2005).”
The State of Research on Situational Judgment Tests: A Content Analysis and Directions for Future Research (2014, methodology): “Finally, split-half reliability is obtained by computing intercorrelations between one half of a test and the other using the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula (as done in Nguyen et al., 2005).”
Situational judgment tests: A review of recent research (2008, background): “The meta-analysis of Nguyen et al. (2005a) found a difference in mean SJT scores between Whites and Blacks of 0.38 standard deviations in favour of White candidates.”
Situational judgment tests: An overview of current research (2009, background): “One possible remedy for faking is to use knowledge instructions (Nguyen et al., 2005), rather than behavioral tendency questions.”