人员选择:情景测试还是面试?有效性与正义的困境

H. Steensma, Coby Doreleijers
{"title":"人员选择:情景测试还是面试?有效性与正义的困境","authors":"H. Steensma, Coby Doreleijers","doi":"10.2190/9YW7-F1J8-FE4L-AHKR","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article compares the reactions of employment applicants to two different tools commonly used in screening applicants for positions: the employment interview and the work sample/situational test. The study was done in a real job setting. Over 150 applicants for a position as a campsite manager and/or instructor were interviewed for that position and participated in an assessment center. Before any decisions on the hiring decisions were announced, the applicants filled out questionnaires measuring their perception of the fairness of these selection methods and their satisfaction with them. This article reports the results of the subsequent analysis of these responses. The results supported hypotheses derived from procedural justice theories. Applicants were more satisfied with employment interviews, and employment interviews scored higher on perceived fairness, voice, control, trust, and clarity of","PeriodicalId":371129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Individual Employment Rights","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PERSONNEL SELECTION: SITUATIONAL TEST OR EMPLOYMENT INTERVIEW? THE VALIDITY VERSUS JUSTICE DILEMMA\",\"authors\":\"H. Steensma, Coby Doreleijers\",\"doi\":\"10.2190/9YW7-F1J8-FE4L-AHKR\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article compares the reactions of employment applicants to two different tools commonly used in screening applicants for positions: the employment interview and the work sample/situational test. The study was done in a real job setting. Over 150 applicants for a position as a campsite manager and/or instructor were interviewed for that position and participated in an assessment center. Before any decisions on the hiring decisions were announced, the applicants filled out questionnaires measuring their perception of the fairness of these selection methods and their satisfaction with them. This article reports the results of the subsequent analysis of these responses. The results supported hypotheses derived from procedural justice theories. Applicants were more satisfied with employment interviews, and employment interviews scored higher on perceived fairness, voice, control, trust, and clarity of\",\"PeriodicalId\":371129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Individual Employment Rights\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Individual Employment Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2190/9YW7-F1J8-FE4L-AHKR\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Individual Employment Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2190/9YW7-F1J8-FE4L-AHKR","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

这篇文章比较了求职者对两种常用的筛选求职者的工具的反应:面试和工作样本/情景测试。这项研究是在一个真实的工作环境中进行的。150多名申请营地经理和/或讲师职位的申请人参加了该职位的面试,并参加了一个评估中心。在招聘决定公布之前,申请人填写了调查问卷,衡量他们对这些选择方法的公平性的看法以及他们对这些方法的满意度。本文报告了对这些响应的后续分析结果。研究结果支持程序正义理论的假设。求职者对求职面试更满意,求职面试在感知公平、声音、控制、信任和清晰度方面得分更高
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
PERSONNEL SELECTION: SITUATIONAL TEST OR EMPLOYMENT INTERVIEW? THE VALIDITY VERSUS JUSTICE DILEMMA
This article compares the reactions of employment applicants to two different tools commonly used in screening applicants for positions: the employment interview and the work sample/situational test. The study was done in a real job setting. Over 150 applicants for a position as a campsite manager and/or instructor were interviewed for that position and participated in an assessment center. Before any decisions on the hiring decisions were announced, the applicants filled out questionnaires measuring their perception of the fairness of these selection methods and their satisfaction with them. This article reports the results of the subsequent analysis of these responses. The results supported hypotheses derived from procedural justice theories. Applicants were more satisfied with employment interviews, and employment interviews scored higher on perceived fairness, voice, control, trust, and clarity of
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信