Incremental validity of situational judgment tests

By J. Clevenger, G. M. Pereira, D. Wiechmann, Neal Schmitt, V. S. Harvey. 2001

203 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9cf68cde0f074290e53d93ca9860a59be8506443

How researchers see this paper

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

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. Robert E. Ployhart
2. Filip Lievens
3. Michael A. McDaniel
4. Deborah L. Whetzel
5. P. Sackett
6. Helga Peeters
7. Neal Schmitt
8. Eveline Schollaert

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

1. Michael A. McDaniel
2. Deborah L. Whetzel
3. Robert E. Ployhart
4. Filip Lievens
5. Eveline Schollaert
6. Helga Peeters
7. N. Nguyen
8. M. Biderman

In Social Psychology

1. Filip Lievens
2. Robert E. Ployhart
3. W. L. Grubb
4. Jose M. Cortina
5. N. Nguyen
6. Neal Schmitt
7. P. Sackett
8. Michael A. McDaniel

Citations in the corpus

• Situational Judgment and Job Performance (2002, background): “This study and Clevenger et al. (2001) found SJT 250 CHAN AND SCHMITT scores to be uncorrelated with cognitive ability, but other researchers have found SJT scores to be substantially correlated with cognitive ability test scores (e.g., Weekley & Jones, 1999) and a meta-analysis by McDaniel et al.…”
• Situational Judgment: Antecedents and Relationships with Performance (2005, methodology): “Within the Big Five framework, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, and Emotional Stability have been found to be related to SJTs (Clevenger et al., 2001; McDaniel & SITUATIONAL TESTING 83 Nguyen, 2001; Mullins & Schmitt, 1998; Smith & McDaniel, 1998; Weekley & Jones, 1999).”
• Personnel selection. (2008, background): “A range of primary studies has also examined the incremental contribution to validity of one or more newer predictors over one or more established predictors (e.g., Clevenger et al. 2001, Lievens et al. 2003, Mount et al. 2000).”
• SITUATIONAL JUDGMENT TESTS, RESPONSE INSTRUCTIONS, AND VALIDITY: A META‐ANALYSIS (2007, background): “However, several studies have reported incremental validity of a SJT over a battery containing cognitive ability and personality (Chan & Schmitt, 2002; Clevenger et al., 2001; O’Connell, Hartman, McDaniel, Grubb, & Lawrence, in press; Weekley & Ployhart 2005).”
• How similar are personality scales of the “same” construct? A meta-analytic investigation (2010, unknown): “…Task/Technical/Overall Performance, OCB/Contextual Performance O, C, E, A, N Christiansen et al, 1994 Task/Technical/Overall Performance C, E, N Clevenger et al, 2001 Task/Technical/Overall Performance C Colbert et al, 2004 CWB/Deviance O, C, E, A, N Colbert et al, 2004- unpublished results…”
• Situational judgment tests: A review of recent research (2008, background): “Various primary studies have examined whether SJTs significantly add to the prediction of job performance over cognitive ability, job knowledge, job experience, and personality (Chan and Schmitt, 2002; Clevenger et al., 2001; Lievens et al., 2005a; McDaniel et al., 2001; Oswald et al., 2004; Weekley”
• Situational Judgment Tests and their Predictiveness of College Students’ Success: The Influence of Faking (2005, background): “A third important advantage is that SJTs show less adverse impact on minorities than traditional cognitive ability tests ( Clevenger et al., 2001 ), although it has been argued that this may be the result of the lower reliability of SJTs (Chan & Schmitt, 1997; Schmitt, Clause, & Pulakos, 1996).”