Concern about the construct validity of assessment centre judgements has led to calls for research into observers' cognitive processes. In an experiment comparing the Traditional observation procedure against use of a Behavioural Checklist and of Behavioural Coding, six outcome variables were examined. The methods were found to yield similar outcomes in terms of accuracy of judgement, accuracy of written evidence, correlation between dimension ratings, and attitude toward the method employed. However, significant between-method differences were observed in variability between observers and in their willingness to recommend a procedure. It is argued that Behavioural Coding has special merit in assessment centres; the method reduces the cognitive demands placed on assessors, and valuably structures their information-processing. Traditional objections to simultaneous observation and classification are shown to be inappropriate.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract