Dimension and exercise variance in assessment center scores: A large-scale evaluation of multitrait-multimethod studies
This study addresses 3 questions regarding assessment center construct validity: (a) Are assessment center ratings best thought of is reflecting dimension constructs (dimension model). exercises (exercise model). or a combination? (b) To what extent do dimensions or exercises account for variance? (...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2001
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/5622 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/lkcsb_research/article/6621/viewcontent/large.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Singapore Management University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | This study addresses 3 questions regarding assessment center construct validity: (a) Are assessment center ratings best thought of is reflecting dimension constructs (dimension model). exercises (exercise model). or a combination? (b) To what extent do dimensions or exercises account for variance? (c) Which design characteristics increase dimension variance? To this end, a large set of multitrait-multimethod studies (N = 34) were analyzed, showing that assessment center ratings were best represented (i.e., in terms of fit and admissible solutions) by a model with correlated dimensions and exercises specified a correlated uniquenesses. In this model, dimension variance equals exercise variance. Significantly more dimension variance was found when fewer dimensions were used and when assessors were psychologists. Use of behavioral checklists, a lower dimension-exercise ratio. and similar exercises also increased dimension variance. |
|---|