Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-17T01:32:08.829Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Perceptions of assessment center exercises: between exercises differences and interventions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2024

Sylvia G. Roch
Sylvia G. Roch*
Affiliation:
University at Albany, State University of New York, College of Arts and Sciences, Albany, NY, USA
*
Email: sroch@albany.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Preliminary research has demonstrated that not all assessment center (AC) exercises are viewed as equally just or motivating. The current research builds upon this research and investigates the relationships between six AC exercises and perceptions of self-efficacy, motivation, assessor bias, and fairness. Using a 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design (two informational justice interventions and one rating timing intervention), 286 working adults completed a survey designed to investigate differences between AC exercises and to investigate interventions designed to influence AC exercise perceptions. The results show not only significant perceptual differences between assessor-rated exercises and an ability test but also differences among the rated exercises. The results suggest that an ability test can be perceived as both among the most just and motivating exercises. Lastly, even though the experimental interventions did not have their anticipated effects, the results suggest benefits to having assessors rate recorded participant behaviors versus rating “live” behaviors, benefits that to a certain extent depend on whether participants had previously attended an assessment center.

Keywords

Assessment centersapplicant reactionsapplicant motivation
Type
Focal Article
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , First View , pp. 1 - 13
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 491–500. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, N., & Witvliet, C. (2008). Fairness reactions to personnel selection methods: An international comparison between the Netherlands, the United States, France, Spain, Portugal, and Singapore. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 16(1), 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2008.00404.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banyai, I. (1998). Zoom. Puffin Books.Google Scholar
Bell, B. S., Wiechmann, D., & Ryan, A. M. (2006). Consequences of organizational justice expectations in a selection system. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 455–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, D., Schmitt, N., DeShon, R. P., Clause, C. S., & Delbridge, K. (1997). Reactions to cognitive ability tests: The relationships between race, test performance, face validity perceptions, and test-taking motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 300–310. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.2.300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386–400. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., Long, D. M., Rodell, J., & Halvorsen-Ganepola, M. (2015). Adding the “in” to justice: A qualitative and quantitative investigation of the differential effects of justice rule adherence and violation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 278–297. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B., Rodell, J., Long, D., Zapata, C., Conlon, D., & Wesson, W. (2013). Justice at the millennium, a decade later: A meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 199–236. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodson, J. R., & McGee, G. W. (1991). Enhancing individual perceptions of objectivity in performance appraisal. Journal of Business Research, 22(4), 293–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(91)90036-W,CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harold, C. M., Holtz, B. C., Griepentrog, B. K., Brewer, L. M., & Marsh, S. M. (2016). Investigating the effects of applicant justice perceptions on job offer acceptance. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 199–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausknecht, J. P., Day, D. V., & Thomas, S. C. (2004). Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 56, 639–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00003.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedge, J. W., & Teachout, M. S. (2000). Exploring the concept of acceptability as a criterion for evaluation performance measures. Group and Organization Management, 25, 22–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601100251003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, B. J., Kennedy, C. L. LoPilato, A. C., Monahan, E. L., & Lance, C. E. (2015). A review of the content, criterion-related, and construct-related validity of AC exercises. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 1143–1168. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038707.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hülsheger, U. R., & Anderson, N. (2009). Applicant perspectives in selection: Going beyond preference reactions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17(4), 335–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2009.00477.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joiner, D. A. (2000). Guidelines and ethical considerations for AC operations: International task force on AC guidelines. Public Personnel Management, 29(3), 315–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/009102600002900302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
König, C. J., Fell, C. B., Steffen, V., & Vanderveken, S. (2015). Applicant reactions are similar across countries: A refined replication with AC data from the European Union. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 14(4), 213–217. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, D. E., & Thornton, G. C. (2009). A cross-cultural look at AC practices: Survey results from Western Europe and North America. Journal of Applied Psychology: An International Review, 58, 557–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00371.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kravitz, D. A., Stinson, V., & Chavez, T. L. (1996). Evaluations of tests used for making selection and promotion decisions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 4(1), 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.1996.tb00045.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lance, C. E. (2008). Why ACs do not work the way they are supposed to. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.00017.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanik, M. Why use assessment centers? Because they increase quality of hires, Pinsight. https://www.pinsight.com/blog/why-use-assessment-centers/.Google Scholar
Leventhal, G. S. (1980). What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In Gergen, K., Greenberg, M., & Willis, R. (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 27–55). Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lievens, F. (2002). Trying to understand the different pieces of the construct validity puzzle of ACs: An examination of assessor and assessee effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 675–686. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, E. A., Motowidlo, S. J., & Bobko, P. (1986). Using self-efficacy theory to resolve the conflict between goal-setting theory and expectancy theory in organizational behavior and industrial/organizational psychology. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 328–338. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macan, T. H., Avedon, M. J., Paese, M., & Smith, D. E. (1994). The effects of applicants’ reactions to cognitive ability tests and an AC. Personnel Psychology, 47(4), 715–738. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1994.tb01573.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, R. A., Pineault, L., & Hong, Y. H. (2022). Normalizing the use of single-item measures: Validation of the single-item compendium for organizational psychology. Journal of Business and Psychology, 37(4), 639–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09813-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maurer, T. J., Solamon, J. M., Andrews, K. D., & Troxtel, D. D. (2001). Interviewee coaching, preparation strategies, and response strategies in relation to performance in situational employment interviews: An extension of Maurer, Solamon, and Troxtel, 1998. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 709–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.4.709.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melchers, K. G., & Körner, B. (2019). Is it possible to improve test takers’ perceptions of ability tests by providing an explanation? Journal of Personnel Psychology, 18(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merkulova, N., Melchers, K. G., Kleinmann, M., Annen, H., & Tresch, T. S. (2014). Effects of individual differences on applicant perceptions of an operational AC. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 22, 355–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moscoso, S., & Salgado, J. F. (2004). Fairness reactions to personnel selection techniques in Spain and Portugal. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12(1-2), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0965-075X.2004.00273.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oostrom, J. K., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Klehe, U. (2019). A new scoring procedure in ACs: insights from interaction analysis Personnel. Assessment and Decisions, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2019.01.005.Google Scholar
Phillips, J. M., & Gully, S. M. (2002). Fairness reactions to personnel selection techniques in Singapore and the United States. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13(8), 1186–1205. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190210149475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ployhart, R. E., & Ehrhart, M. G. (2002). Modeling the practical effects of applicant reactions: Subgroup differences in test-taking motivation, test performance, and selection rates. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10(4), 258–270. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rego, A., Sousa, F., Marques, C., Pina, M., & Cunha, E. (2012). Retail employees’ self-efficacy and hope predicting their positive affect and creativity. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 21(6), 923–945. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2011.610891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roch, S. G. Applicant perceptions of assessment center exercise scoring objectivity: motivation and justice 2019. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Roch, S. G., Mishra, V., & Trombini, E. (2014). Does selection measure scoring influence motivation: One size fits all? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 22, 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roch, S. G., Trombini, E., & Mishra, V. Rater teams, perceived dimension subjectivity, and AC participant motivation. In: 23rd Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Francisco, CA, 2008.Google Scholar
Rupp, D. E., Gibbons, A. M., Baldwin, A. M., Snyder, L. A., Spain, S. M., Woo, S. E., Brummel, B. J., Sims, C. A., & Kim, M. (2006). An initial validation of developmental ACs as accurate assessments and effective training interventions. The Psychologist-Manager Journal., 9, 171–200. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15503461tpmj0902_7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rupp, D. E., Hoffman, B. J., Bischof, D., Byham, W., Collins, L., Gibbons, A., & Thornton, G. (2015). Guidelines and ethical considerations for AC operations. Journal of Management, 41(4), 1244–1273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314567780.Google Scholar
Sanchez, R. J., Truxillo, D. M., & Bauer, T. N. (2000). Development and examination of an expectancy-based measure of test-taking motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 739–750. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.739 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smither, J. W., Reilly, R. R., Millsap, R. E., Pearlman, K., & Stoffey, R. W. (1993). Applicant reactions to selection procedures. Personnel Psychology, 46(1), 49–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1993.tb00867.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, J., & Shahani-Denning, C. (2012). Fairness reactions to personnel selection methods: A look at professionals in Mumbai, India. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20(3), 297–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2012.00601.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steiner, D. D., & Gilliland, S. W. (1996). Fairness reactions to personnel selection techniques in France and the United States. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(2), 134–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.2.134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
JASP Team (2003). JASP (Version 0.17.3) [Computer software].Google Scholar
Thornton, G. C., & Rupp, D. (2006). ACs in human resource management: Strategies for prediction, diagnosis, and development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Truxillo, D. M., Bodner, T. E., Bertolino, M., Bauer, T. N., & Yonce, C. A. (2009). Effects of explanations on applicant reactions: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 346–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2009.00478.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zapata-Phelan, C. P., Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B., & Livingston, B. (2009). Procedural justice, interactional justice, and task performance: The mediating role of intrinsic motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.08.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar