Show simple item record

2020-01-27Zeitschriftenartikel DOI: 10.1111/peps.12385
Is it all in the eye of the beholder?
dc.contributor.authorFreudenstein, Jan-Philipp
dc.contributor.authorSchäpers, Philipp
dc.contributor.authorRoemer, Lena
dc.contributor.authorMussel, Patrick
dc.contributor.authorKrumm, Stefan
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-27T10:08:06Z
dc.date.available2022-07-27T10:08:06Z
dc.date.issued2020-01-27none
dc.date.updated2020-10-26T20:52:37Z
dc.identifier.urihttp://edoc.hu-berlin.de/18452/25721
dc.description.abstractRecent research challenges the importance of situation descriptions for situational judgment test (SJT) performance. This study contributes to resolving the ongoing debate on whether SJTs are situational measures, by incorporating findings on person × situation interactions into SJT research. Specifically, across three studies (NTotal = 1,239), we first tested whether situation construal (i.e., the individual perception of situations in SJTs) predicts responses to SJT items. Second, we assessed whether the relevance of situation construal for SJT performance depends on test elements (i.e., situation descriptions and response options) and item features (i.e., description-dependent vs. description-independent SJT items). Lastly, we determined whether situation construal has incremental validity for job-related criteria over and above SJT performance. The results showed that, for most SJT items, situation construal significantly contributed to SJT performance, even if only response options were available. This was also true for SJT items that are significantly more difficult to solve when situation descriptions are omitted (i.e., description-dependent SJT items). Finally, situation construal explained variance in relevant criteria over and above SJT performance. Despite recent efforts to reconceptualize SJTs, our results suggest that they can still be viewed as situational measures. However, situation descriptions may be less crucial for these underlying situational processes. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.eng
dc.description.sponsorshipDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001659
dc.language.isoengnone
dc.publisherHumboldt-Universität zu Berlin
dc.rights(CC BY 4.0) Attribution 4.0 Internationalger
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectperson × situation interactioneng
dc.subjectsituation construaleng
dc.subjectsituational judgment testeng
dc.subjectvalidityeng
dc.subject.ddc150 Psychologienone
dc.titleIs it all in the eye of the beholder?none
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:kobv:11-110-18452/25721-4
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/peps.12385none
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.18452/25036
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionnone
local.edoc.pages32none
local.edoc.type-nameZeitschriftenartikel
local.edoc.container-typeperiodical
local.edoc.container-type-nameZeitschrift
local.edoc.container-year2020none
dc.description.versionPeer Reviewednone
dc.identifier.eissn1744-6570
dc.title.subtitleThe importance of situation construal for situational judgment test performancenone
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitlePersonnel psychologynone
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume73none
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.issue4none
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishernameWiley-Blackwellnone
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublisherplaceMalden, Mass. [u.a.]none
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pagestart669none
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pageend700none
bua.departmentLebenswissenschaftliche Fakultätnone

Show simple item record