The use of role-player prompts in assessment center exercises

International Journal of Selection and Assessment

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 190-197

  Schollaert, Eveline ^a   Lievens, Filip ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79955945379     PISSN: 0965075X     EISSN: 14682389     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00546.x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bauer, T. N., Truxillo, D. M., Sanchez, R. J., Craig, J., Ferrara, P., & Campion, M. A. (2001). Applicant reactions to selection: Development of the selection procedural justice scale. Personnel Psychology, 54, 387-419.
2. Bozeman, D. P., & Kacmar, K. M. (1997). A cybernetic model of impression management processes in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 9-30.
3. Brannick, M. T. (2008). Back to basics of test construction and scoring. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 131-133.
4. Brannick, M. T., Michaels, C. E., & Baker, D. P. (1989). Construct validity of in-basket scores. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 957-963.
5. 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.
6. Epstein, S. (1979). The stability of behavior: I. On predicting most of the people much of the time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1097-1126.
7. Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (pp. 7-28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
8. Goldstein, I. L., & Ford, J. K. (2002). Training in organizations. Belmont, CA: Thomson Learning.
9. Hausknecht, J. P., Day, D. V., & Thomas, S. C. (2004). Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 57, 639-683.
10. Howard, A. (2008). Making assessment centers work the way they are supposed to. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 98-104.
11. International Taskforce on Assessment Centers Guidelines. (2009). Guidelines and ethical considerations for assessment center operations. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 243-253.
12. Lance, C. E. (2008). Why assessment centers (ACs) don't work the way they're supposed to. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 84-97.
13. Lievens, F. (2008). What does exercise-based assessment really mean? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 117-120.
14. 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.
15. Lievens, F., & Klimoski, R. J. (2001). Understanding the assessment center process: Where are we now? International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 16, 246-286.
16. Lievens, F., Tett, R. P., & Schleicher, D. J. (2009). Assessment centers at the crossroads: Toward a reconceptualization of assessment center exercises. In J. J. Martocchio, & H. Liao (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 99-152). Bingley: JAI Press.
17. Mischel, W. (1973). Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality. Psychological Review, 80, 252-283.
18. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998). Advanced progressive matrices manual (1998 ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press.
19. Reilly, R. R., Henry, S., & Smither, J. W. (1990). An examination of the effects of using behavior checklists on the construct validity of assessment center dimensions. Personnel Psychology, 43, 71-84.
20. Ryan, A. M., & Greguras, G. (1998). Life is not multiple choice: Reactions to the alternatives. In M. D. Hakel (Ed.), Alternatives to traditional assessment (pp. 183-202). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Shore, T. H., Thornton, G. C., III, & Shore, L. M. (1990). Construct validity of two categories of assessment center ratings. Personnel Psychology, 43, 101-116.
22. Tett, R. P., & Burnett, D. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 500-517.
23. Tett, R. P., & Guterman, H. A. (2000). Situation trait relevance, trait expression, and cross-situational consistency: Testing a principle of trait activation. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 397-423.
24. Thornton, G. C., III, & Byham, W. C. (1982). Assessment centers and managerial performance. New York: Academic Press.
25. Thornton, G. C., III, & Mueller-Hanson, R. A. (2004). Developing organizational simulations: A guide for practitioners and students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
26. Whetzel, D. L., McDaniel, M. A., & Nguyen, N. T. (2008). Subgroup differences in situational judgment test performance: A meta-analysis. Human Performance, 21, 291-309.
27. Zedeck, S. A. (1986). A process analysis of the assessment center method. Research in Organization, 8, 259-296.