nach oben

Journal of Business and Psychology

Erschienen in:

01.06.2015

Why do Situational Interviews Predict Job Performance? The Role of Interviewees’ Ability to Identify Criteria

verfasst von: Pia V. Ingold, Martin Kleinmann, Cornelius J. König, Klaus G. Melchers, Chad H. Van Iddekinge

Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology | Ausgabe 2/2015

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed at shedding light on why situational interviews (SIs) predict job performance. We examined an explanation based upon the importance of interviewees’ Ability to Identify Criteria (ATIC, i.e., to read the targeted interview dimensions) for SI performance.

Design/Methodology/Approach

Data were obtained from 97 interviewees who participated in a mock interview to train for future applications. This approach enabled us to conduct the SIs under standardized conditions, to assess interviewees’ ATIC, and at the same time, to collect job performance data from interviewee’s current supervisors.

Findings

We found that interviewees’ ATIC scores were not only positively related to their interview performance, but also predicted job performance as rated by their supervisors. Furthermore, controlling for interviewees’ ATIC significantly lowered the relationship between performance in the SI and job performance.

Implications

Better understanding of the mechanisms that underlie the criterion-related validity of SIs is crucial for theoretical progress and improving personnel selection procedures. This study highlights the relevance of interviewees’ ATIC for predicting job performance. It also underscores the importance of constructing interviews to enable candidates to show their criterion-relevant abilities.

Originality/Value

This study shows that interviewees’ ATIC contributes to a better understanding of why the SI predicts job performance.

Vorheriger Artikel Employee Attachment: Implications for Supervisor Trustworthiness and Trust

Nächster Artikel The Associations between Ethical Organizational Culture, Burnout, and Engagement: A Multilevel Study

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

As pointed out by a reviewer, these values might overestimate interrater reliability because interviewers in panel interviews observe the same random response errors (see Huffcutt et al. 2013).

Bangerter, A., Roulin, N., & König, C. J. (2012). Personnel selection as a signaling game. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 719–738. doi:10.1037/a0026078.CrossRefPubMed

Barrick, M. R., Dustin, S., Giluk, T., Stewart, G., Shaffer, J., & Swider, B. (2012). Candidate characteristics driving initial impressions during rapport building: Implications for employment interview validity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85, 330–352. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.02036.x.CrossRef

Barrick, M. R., Shaffer, J. A., & DeGrassi, S. W. (2009). What you see may not be what you get: Relationships among self-presentation tactics and ratings of interview and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1394–1411. doi:10.1037/a0016532.CrossRefPubMed

Barrick, M. R., Swider, B. W., & Stewart, G. L. (2010). Initial evaluations in the interview: Relationships with subsequent interviewer evaluations and employment offers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 1163–1172. doi:10.1037/A0019918.CrossRefPubMed

Berry, C. M., Sackett, P. R., & Landers, R. N. (2007). Revisiting interview-cognitive ability relationships: Attending to specific range restriction mechanisms in meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60, 837–874. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00093.x.CrossRef

Borman, W. C., & Brush, D. (1993). More progress toward a taxonomy of managerial performance requirements. Human Performance, 6, 1–21. doi:10.1207/s15327043hup0601_1.CrossRef

Bott, J. P., Svyantek, D. J., Goodman, S. A., & Bernal, D. S. (2003). Expanding the performance domain: Who says nice guys finish last? International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11, 137–152. doi:10.1108/eb028967.CrossRef

Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105. doi:10.1037/h0046016.CrossRefPubMed

Campion, M. A., Palmer, D. K., & Campion, J. E. (1997). A review of structure in the selection interview. Personnel Psychology, 50, 655–702. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00709.x.CrossRef

Conway, J. M., & Peneno, G. M. (1999). Comparing structured interview question types: Construct validity and applicant reactions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 13, 485–506. doi:10.1023/A:1022914803347.CrossRef

Cortina, J. M., Goldstein, N. B., Payne, S. C., Davison, H. K., & Gilliland, S. W. (2000). The incremental validity of interview scores over and above cognitive ability and conscientiousness scores. Personnel Psychology, 53, 325–351. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.tb00204.x.CrossRef

Dipboye, R. L., Macan, T. H., & Shahani-Denning, C. (2012). The selection interview from the interviewer and applicant perspective: Can’t have one without the other. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of personnel assessment and selection (pp. 323–353). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Ferris, G. R., & Judge, T. A. (1991). Personnel/human resources management: A political influence perspective. Journal of Management, 17, 447–488. doi:10.1177/014920639101700208.CrossRef

Freedman, L. S., & Schatzkin, A. (1992). Sample-size for studying intermediate end-points within intervention trials or observational studies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 136, 1148–1159.PubMed

Griffin, B. (2014). The Ability to identify criteria: Its relationship with social understanding, preparation, and impression management in affecting predictor performance in a high-stakes selection context. Human Performance, 27, 147–164. doi:10.1080/08959285.2014.882927.CrossRef

Haaland, S., & Christiansen, N. D. (2002). Implications of trait activation theory for evaluating the construct validity of assessment center ratings. Personnel Psychology, 55, 137–163. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2002.tb00106.x.CrossRef

Harris, M. M. (1999). What is being measured? In R. H. Eder & M. M. Harris (Eds.), The employment interview handbook (pp. 143–155). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRef

Huffcutt, A. I. (2011). An empirical review of the employment interview construct literature. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19, 62–81. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00535.x.CrossRef

Huffcutt, A. I., & Arthur, W. (1994). Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry-level jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 184–190. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.79.2.184.CrossRef

Huffcutt, A. I., Conway, J. M., Roth, P. L., & Stone, N. J. (2001a). Identification and meta-analytic assessment of psychological constructs measured in employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 897–913. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.897.CrossRefPubMed

Huffcutt, A. I., Culbertson, S. S., & Weyhrauch, W. S. (2013). Employment interview reliability: New meta-analytic estimates by structure and format. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 21, 264–276. doi:10.1111/ijsa.12036.CrossRef

Huffcutt, A. I., Van Iddekinge, C. H., & Roth, P. L. (2011). Understanding applicant behavior in employment interviews: A theoretical model of interviewee performance. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 353–367. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2011.05.003.

Huffcutt, A. I., Weekley, J. A., Wiesner, W. H., Groot, T. G., & Jones, C. (2001b). Comparison of situational and behavior description interview questions for higher-level positions. Personnel Psychology, 54, 619–644. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00225.x.CrossRef

Jansen, A., Lievens, F., & Kleinmann, M. (2011). Do individual differences in perceiving situational demands moderate the relationship between personality and assessment center dimension ratings? Human Performance, 24, 231–250. doi:10.1080/08959285.2011.580805.CrossRef

Jansen, A., Melchers, K. G., Lievens, F., Kleinmann, M., Brändli, M., Fraefel, L., et al. (2013). Situation assessment as an ignored factor in the behavioral consistency paradigm underlying the validity of personnel selection procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 326–341. doi:10.1037/a0031257.CrossRefPubMed

Kepes, S., Banks, G. C., McDaniel, M., & Whetzel, D. L. (2012). Publication bias in the organizational sciences. Organizational Research Methods, 15, 624–662. doi:10.1177/1094428112452760.CrossRef

Klehe, U.-C., König, C. J., Richter, G. M., Kleinmann, M., & Melchers, K. G. (2008). Transparency in structured interviews: Consequences for construct and criterion-related validity. Human Performance, 21, 107–137. doi:10.1080/08959280801917636.CrossRef

Kleinmann, M. (1993). Are rating dimensions in assessment centers transparent for participants? Consequences for criterion and construct validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 988–993. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.6.988.CrossRef

Kleinmann, M., Ingold, P. V., Lievens, F., Jansen, A., Melchers, K. G., & König, C. J. (2011). A different look at why selection procedures work: The role of candidates’ ability to identify criteria. Organizational Psychology Review, 1, 128–146. doi:10.1177/2041386610387000.CrossRef

König, C. J., Melchers, K. G., Kleinmann, M., Richter, G. M., & Klehe, U.-C. (2007). Candidates’ ability to identify criteria in nontransparent selection procedures: Evidence from an assessment center and a structured interview. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 283–292. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00388.x.CrossRef

Latham, G. P., Saari, L. M., Pursell, E. D., & Campion, M. A. (1980). The situational interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 422–427. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.65.4.422.CrossRef

Latham, G. P., & Sue-Chan, C. (1999). A meta-analysis of the situational interview: An enumerative review of reasons for its validity. Canadian Psychology, 40, 56–67. doi:10.1037/h0086826.CrossRef

Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 34–47. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.34.CrossRef

Levashina, J., Hartwell, C. J., Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2013). The structured employment interview: Narrative and quantitative review of research literature. Personnel Psychology, 67, 241–293. doi:10.1111/peps.12052.CrossRef

Lievens, F., Chasteen, C. S., Day, E. A., & Christiansen, N. D. (2006). Large-scale investigation of the role of trait activation theory for understanding assessment center convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 247–258. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.247.CrossRefPubMed

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Macan, T. (2009). The employment interview: A review of current studies and directions for future research. Human Resource Management Review, 19, 203–218. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.03.006.CrossRef

MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83–104. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

Maurer, S. D., Sue-Chan, C., & Latham, G. (1999). The situational interview. In R. W. Eder & M. M. Harris (Eds.), The employment interview handbook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

McDaniel, M. A., Whetzel, A. M., Schmidt, F. L., & Maurer, S. D. (1994). The validity of employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 599–616. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.79.4.599.CrossRef

McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1, 30–46. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.30.CrossRef

Melchers, K. G., Bosser, D., Hartstein, T., & Kleinmann, M. (2012). Assessment of situational demands in a selection interview: Reflective style or sensitivity? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20, 475–485. doi:10.1111/Ijsa.12010.CrossRef

Melchers, K. G., Ingold, P. V., Wilhelmy, A., & Kleinmann, M. (in press). Beyond validity: Shedding light on the social situation in employment interviews. In I. Nikolaou & J. K. Oostrom (Eds.), Employee Recruitment, Selection, and Assessment: Contemporary Issues for Theory and Practice. Hove: Psychology Press.

Melchers, K. G., Klehe, U.-C., Richter, G. M., Kleinmann, M., König, C. J., & Lievens, F. (2009). “I know what you want to know”: The impact of interviewees’ ability to identify criteria on interview performance and construct-related validity. Human Performance, 22, 355–374. doi:10.1080/08959280903120295.CrossRef

Melchers, K. G., Kleinmann, M., Richter, G. M., König, C. J., & Klehe, U. C. (2004). Messen Einstellungsinterviews das, was sie messen sollen? Zur Bedeutung der Bewerberkognitionen über bewertetes Verhalten [Do selection interviews measure what they intend to measure? The impact of applicants’ cognitions about evaluated behavior]. Zeitschrift für Personalpsychologie, 3, 159–169. doi:10.1026/1617-6391.3.4.159.CrossRef

Melchers, K. G., Lienhardt, N., Von Aarburg, M., & Kleinmann, M. (2011). Is more structure really better? A comparison of frame-of-reference training and descriptively anchored rating scales to improve interviewers’ rating quality. Personnel Psychology, 64, 53–87. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01202.x.CrossRef

Mento, A. J., Steel, R. P., & Karren, R. J. (1987). A meta-analytic study of the effects of goal-setting on task-performance: 1966–1984. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 52–83. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(87)90045-8.CrossRef

Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246–268. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.102.2.246.CrossRefPubMed

Motowidlo, S. J. (1999). Asking about past behavior versus hypothetical behavior. In R. H. Eder & M. M. Harris (Eds.), The employment interview handbook (pp. 179–216). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRef

Oswald, F. L., Schmitt, N., Kim, B. H., Ramsay, L. J., & Gillespie, M. A. (2004). Developing a biodata measure and situational judgment inventory as predictors of college student performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 187–207. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.187.CrossRefPubMed

Peeters, H., & Lievens, F. (2006). Verbal and nonverbal impression management tactics in behavior description and situational interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 206–222. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00348.x.CrossRef

Roch, S. G., Woehr, D. J., Mishra, V., & Kieszczynska, U. (2012). Rater training revisited: An updated meta-analytic review of frame-of-reference training. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85, 370–395. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.02045.x.CrossRef

Roth, P. L., & Huffcutt, A. I. (2013). A meta-analysis of interviews and cognitive ability: Back to the future? Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12, 157–169. doi:10.1027/1866-5888/a000091.CrossRef

Roth, P. L., Van Iddekinge, C. H., Huffcutt, A. I., Eidson, C. E., & Schmit, M. J. (2005). Personality saturation in structured interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 261–273. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2005.00323.x.CrossRef

Rothstein, H. R. (1990). Interrater reliability of job performance ratings: Growth to asymptote level with increasing opportunity to observe. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 322–327. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.75.3.322.CrossRef

Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S. (2002). Comprehensive meta-analysis of the construct validity of the employment interview. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11, 299–324. doi:10.1080/13594320244000184.CrossRef

Seibert, S. E., Crant, J. M., & Kraimer, M. L. (1999). Proactive personality and career success. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 416–427. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.84.3.416.CrossRefPubMed

Speer, A. B., Christiansen, N. D., König, C. J., Melchers, K. G., & Kleinmann, M. (2014). Establishing the cross-situational convergence of the ability to identify criteria: Consistency and prediction across similar and dissimilar assessment center exercises. Human Performance, 27, 44–60. doi:10.1080/08959285.2013.854364.CrossRef

Staufenbiel, T., & Hartz, C. (2000). Organizational citizenship behavior: Entwicklung und erste Validierung eines Meßinstruments [Organizational citizenship behavior: Development and validation of a measurement instrument]. Diagnostica, 46, 73–83. doi:10.1026//0012-1924.46.2.73.CrossRef

Taylor, P. J., & Small, B. (2002). Asking applicants what they would do versus what they did do: A meta-analytic comparison of situational and past behaviour employment interview questions. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 277–294. doi:10.1348/096317902320369712.CrossRef

Tett, R. P., & Burnett, D. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 500. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.500.CrossRefPubMed

Tett, R. P., Guterman, H. A., Bleier, A., & Murphy, P. J. (2000). Development and content validation of a “hyperdimensional” taxonomy of managerial competence. Human Performance, 13, 205–251. doi:10.1207/S15327043HUP1303_1.CrossRef

Tubbs, M. E. (1986). Goal setting: A meta-analytic examination of the empirical evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 474–483. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.474.CrossRef

Van Iddekinge, C. H., Raymark, P. H., Eidson, C. E., & Attenweiler, W. J. (2004). What do structured selection interviews really measure? The construct validity of behavior description interviews. Human Performance, 17, 71–93. doi:10.1207/S15327043HUP1701_4.CrossRef

Van Iddekinge, C. H., Raymark, P. H., & Roth, P. L. (2005). Assessing personality with a structured employment interview: Construct-related validity and susceptibility to response inflation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 536–552. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.3.536.CrossRefPubMed

Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601–617. doi:10.1177/014920639101700305.CrossRef

Woehr, D. J., & Huffcutt, A. I. (1994). Rater training for performance-appraisal: A quantitative review. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 189–205. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.1994.tb00562.x.CrossRef

Titel: Why do Situational Interviews Predict Job Performance? The Role of Interviewees’ Ability to Identify Criteria
verfasst von: Pia V. Ingold
Martin Kleinmann
Cornelius J. König
Klaus G. Melchers
Chad H. Van Iddekinge
Publikationsdatum: 01.06.2015
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology / Ausgabe 2/2015
Print ISSN: 0889-3268
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-353X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9368-3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose

Design/Methodology/Approach

Findings

Implications

Originality/Value

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2015

The “New” Dad: Navigating Fathering Identity Within Organizational Contexts

Internet-Based, Unproctored Assessments on Mobile and Non-Mobile Devices: Usage, Measurement Equivalence, and Outcomes

Political Skill Dimensionality and Impression Management Choice and Effective Use

Employee Attachment: Implications for Supervisor Trustworthiness and Trust

Exploring the Use of Credit Scores in Selection Processes: Beware of Adverse Impact

The Associations between Ethical Organizational Culture, Burnout, and Engagement: A Multilevel Study