2019
DOI: 10.1111/ijsa.12269
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Subgroup differences in situational judgment test scores: Evidence from large applicant samples

Abstract: To promote diversity in organizations it is important to have accurate knowledge about subgroup differences associated with selection procedures. However, current estimates of subgroup differences in situational judgment tests (SJTs) are overwhelmingly based on range‐restricted incumbent samples that are downwardly biased. This study provides much‐needed applicant level estimates of SJT subgroup differences (N = 37,530). As a key finding, Black‐White differences (d = 0.66) were higher than in incumbent samples… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
(87 reference statements)
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…SJTs are widely assumed to yield weaker group score differences relative to general mental ability (GMA) tests, and yet interpersonal skill SJTs exhibit moderate group score differences favoring White test takers (e.g., Bobko & Roth, 2013;Whetzel et al, 2008). Similar group mean score differences have been found among applicants who completed SJTs designed for one of four different occupational groups (Herde et al, 2020). Likewise, female test takers are commonly found to outperform males on SJTs across a variety of domains and settings (Lievens & Motowidlo, 2016;Weekley et al, 2015).…”
Section: Present Studymentioning
confidence: 92%
“…SJTs are widely assumed to yield weaker group score differences relative to general mental ability (GMA) tests, and yet interpersonal skill SJTs exhibit moderate group score differences favoring White test takers (e.g., Bobko & Roth, 2013;Whetzel et al, 2008). Similar group mean score differences have been found among applicants who completed SJTs designed for one of four different occupational groups (Herde et al, 2020). Likewise, female test takers are commonly found to outperform males on SJTs across a variety of domains and settings (Lievens & Motowidlo, 2016;Weekley et al, 2015).…”
Section: Present Studymentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Consequently, applicant samples are more likely to contain lower scoring applicants, whereas incumbent samples are more likely to consist of higher scoring applicants. When incumbent samples are analysed, direct or indirect range restriction can thus give raise to substantially underestimated subgroup difference estimates (Bobko & Roth, 2013 ; Herde, Lievens, Jackson, Shalfrooshan, & Roth, 2019 ; Roth, Le, Oh, Van Iddekinge, & Robbins, 2017 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it is important to note that there now are increasing numbers of female medical students in many countries, so this is a consideration when using an SJT in how scores are weighted and combined with other selection methods in practice. One possible explanation for why females tend to outperform males on SJTs is that SJTs measure (to some extent) aspects of personality where females typically report greater conscientiousness, agreeableness and sensitivity when compared to males [ 26 , 27 ]. Similarly, in Weekley and Jones’s study [ 28 ] where females tended to perform better on an SJT, they argued that this was due to many SJT items in their study relating to interpersonal conflicts or interactions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%