2018
DOI: 10.5093/jwop2018a2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Prediction of Training Proficiency in Firefighters: A Study of Predictive Validity in Spain

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In validity studies, the rating sources of job performance can be the supervisors (e.g., Harris et al, 1995; Campbell and Wiernik, 2015), instructors (e.g., Berges et al, 2018), peers (e.g., Harris and Schaubroeck, 1988; Viswesvaran et al, 2002), and incumbents (e.g., Bang and Reio, 2017; Jyoti and Sharma, 2017; Haider et al, 2018; Rehman and Shahnawaz, 2018). This paper focuses on the interrater reliability of supervisory performance ratings as they are the most frequently used in validity studies and for performance appraisal purposes (Bernardin and Beatty, 1984; Landy and Rastegary, 1989; Viswesvaran et al, 2002; Campbell and Wiernik, 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In validity studies, the rating sources of job performance can be the supervisors (e.g., Harris et al, 1995; Campbell and Wiernik, 2015), instructors (e.g., Berges et al, 2018), peers (e.g., Harris and Schaubroeck, 1988; Viswesvaran et al, 2002), and incumbents (e.g., Bang and Reio, 2017; Jyoti and Sharma, 2017; Haider et al, 2018; Rehman and Shahnawaz, 2018). This paper focuses on the interrater reliability of supervisory performance ratings as they are the most frequently used in validity studies and for performance appraisal purposes (Bernardin and Beatty, 1984; Landy and Rastegary, 1989; Viswesvaran et al, 2002; Campbell and Wiernik, 2015).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…General mental ability (GMA) tests are one of the most valid construct-based predictors of job performance and training success. Thousands of validity studies and many meta-analyses have shown that they are excellent predictors of different organizational criteria, such as supervisory ratings, work sample tests, job knowledge acquisition, grades, production records, instructor ratings, promotions, sales, and wages, and that the correlation between GMA and performance appears to be similar across jobs that differ considerably in content (Schmidt and Hunter, 1998; Murphy, 2002; Ones et al, 2012; Schmitt, 2014; Salgado, 2017a; Berges et al, 2018; Rodríguez and López-Basterra, 2018). Furthermore, the theoretical foundations of GMA are stronger than for any other personnel selection measure (Schmidt and Hunter, 1998; Hunt, 2011; Deary, 2012; Salgado, 2017a).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This research has made several unique contributions to the literature on CR. The first unique contribution has been to show that CR is a relevant predictor of job performance and educational outcomes, and that the magnitude of the validity is similar or even more substantial than the validity of other well-studied predictors (e.g., cognitive abilities, personality dimensions; [88][89][90]). Moreover, in the case of academic performance, the findings showed that CR was a valid predictor for the three types of educational outcomes (i.e., GPA, UEM, and EG).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%