情景判断测验效度的研究述评

文章在回顾近年来情景判断测验研究的基础上,总结了情景判断测验的效标关联效度、结构效度、增量效度和情景判断测验效度的影响因素.研究发现情景判断测验有较高的效标关联效度,是一种较好的人才选拔工具;情景判断测验是一种测量方法,可以用来测量指定的结构;情景判断测验对认知能力、人格、工作知识等变量具有增量效度;试题特性、测验开发模式、研究设计、评分方式等会影响情景判断测验的效度.     

MBTI人格类型量表的效度分析

目的探讨中文版MBTI人格类型量表的内容效度、效标关联效度和结构效度,为其在中国应用提供操作性技术,方法大学本科和专科学生2123名,陆军初级军官276名;MBTI-G量表中文修订版;效标测验包括EPQ、16PF、MMPI-2、A-Type和PM测验。结果(1)经专家评判、中英文版相关分析、自评他评和信度分析,表明中文版MBTI有较好的内容效度。(2)效标关联效度研究发现EI维度具有明显的内外向人格特征;感觉型个体温和、现实和谨慎,直觉型个体则恃强、敢为、果断和中强度A型行为特征;对事型个体稳重、安详、恃强、自律;判断型个体善于交往和社会化程度高,做事有强的责任感、计划性和有恒性,适应新环境能力较强,成就感强。以上发现与MBTI原设计和国外研究吻合。(3)97项题目因子分析最大负荷落在主因素上平均占82．81％,次级负荷占11.02％,仅6题因子分析不理想。(4)修订版MBTI人格类型测验与PM领导行为类型测验间有一定相关;中国军队初级指挥员以ESFJ、ISTJ人格类型为主。结论本研究修订的中文版MBTI具有较好的内容效度、效标关联蚊度和结构效度。     

情境判断测验的效度研究述评

情境判断测验是一种为作答者呈现工作相关的典型情境以及该情境下可能的行为反应, 要求根据指导语提示进行选择或评价的测验形式。随着其理论和实践的发展, 研究者越来越关注情境判断测验的效度研究, 包括对其构想效度、效标关联效度和递增效度的探讨, 以及指导语类型、情境保真度以及计分方式等因素对其效度的影响。基于这些研究进展, 未来情境判断测验实践领域可能的方向是：(1)开发针对特定构想的情境判断测验; (2)结合具体构想选用相应的指导语; (3)应用作假和培训对效度影响的研究结果指导实践。     

优化心理测量的工具:递增效度

递增效度（Incremental Validity）是心理测量中用于评价新测验和优化测量程序的重要概念,它表示一个测量在原有数据或量表基础上对效标预测能力的改进程度,近年来引起了广泛的关注。本文首先介绍了递增效度的概念,然后对这一概念的统计原理和技术做了介绍,最后以心理学中的研究实例来说明其实际运用。     

仿真模拟测评技术信度和效度的初步研究

本研究对典型的仿真测评技术——“角色扮演”测评方法的评分者信度、重测信度和效标关联效度进行了初步研究。结果表明：仿真模拟测评技术具有较强的岗位针对性,在相似情境中具有较高的预测效度,在某些要素上具有测评和培训的双重功能。     

效度概化的理论研究述评

效度概化（validity generalization：VG）是心理测量理论和元分析的结合体,也是元分析在人事测评领域的重要应用。它深刻地挑战了人事测评效度的情景特异论,在工业与组织心理学的发展历程当中具有里程碑意义。该文系统地介绍了效度概化理论的逻辑思路、主要模型、关键理论语与应用,以及研究趋势。     

梅尔美术判断测验在中国应用的信、效度检验

目的:修订梅尔美术判断测验(Meier Art Judgment Test)并对其信度、效度进行检验。方法:通过对来自6所大学、中专共2270人施测梅尔美术判断测验,采用CTT区分度和IRT的模型拟合检验、区分度筛选项目,以霍兰德艺术分测验、学生艺术创作水平自评与艺术过往经历分量表为效标,以及采用效标组法(美术与非美术专业)检验效标关联效度。结果:保留的61题都拟合IRT的2参数logistic模型,量表得分与各效标得分相关显著,美术与非美术专业学生得分存在显著差异; 但测验信息量分析表明,对高能力被试的测量误差相对较大。结论:修订的量表能测量个体的美术判断能力; 今后改进方向应该是增加更难的试题。     

履历数据测评的效度分析

履历数据是人员测评的重要手段, 但其组织情景性限制使得国外同类工具不能适用于国内人事选拔, 国内也缺乏实证研究验证其信度、效度。本研究结合某通信企业的招募选拔工作, 开发履历数据分析工具, 选取250名应聘者的履历数据、一般认知能力、大五个性和面试结果数据, 通过效标关联效度、增量效度思想, 分析履历数据有效性。结果表明, 以面试结果为效标, 履历数据具有良好的效标关联效度, 与其他测评工具组合使用时有良好的增量效度。     

行为面试与无领导小组讨论的预测效度研究

本研究以某金融机构中层管理者胜任力测评为背景,主要探讨行为面试和无领导小组讨论的预测效度.研究证实,行为面试的评价者一致性信度为0.795,以上级绩效评价为效标的预测效度为0.386,对技术-行政任务绩效和周边绩效预测显著,但对领导力任务绩效预测不显著;无领导小组讨论只对领导力任务绩效预测显著,在预测领导力任务绩效方面,它对行为面试有显著的递增效度.     

基于人工神经网络的一种效度凭证求取方法

针对基于统计学的效度凭证求取方法所存在的问题,提出了基于人工神经网络的效度凭证求取方法。蒙特卡罗模拟实验和对实际数据的分析表明,当测验分数和效标分数为单变量且非线性关系时,或者测验分数和效标分数为多变量时,运用神经网络方法可以比统计学方法更好地求取心理测验效度的基于和其他变量关系的凭证。     

面试预测效度和构想效度研究述评

面试是人才甄选中最常用的测量工具。大量研究证实,面试的预测效度比较理想,但不同类型面试的预测效度存在差异。虽然能够证实面试的预测效度较好,但对面试的测量构想却知之甚少。研究面试的构想效度,对于提高面试的递增效度有着重要的实践价值。相对人格成分而言,以往研究对面试能够测量到认知成分形成了更加一致地认识。     

Impact of Assessments of Validity Generalization and Situational Specificity on the Science and Practice of Personnel Selection

The application of meta-analysis, in particular validity generalization (VG) analysis, to the cumulative literature on the validity of selection tests has fundamentally changed the science and practice of personnel selection. VG analyses suggest that the validities of standardized tests and other structured assessments are both higher and more consistent across jobs and organizations than was previously believed. As a result, selection researchers and practitioners can draw on the research literature to make reasonably accurate forecasts about the validity and usefulness of different tests in particular applications. Distinctions between tests of validity generalization and tests of situational specificity are described, and difficulties in demonstrating that validity is constant across the different settings where tests are used are outlined.     

评价中心的结构效度研究

评价中心虽然具备很高的预测效度,但其结构效度指标却不太理想,如研究普遍发现其汇聚效度和区分效度较低。影响评价中心结构效度的因素众多,如评分维度因素（数量和类型）、评价者因素（培训方式和人员类型）、测评方法因素（情景导向特征、特质激活潜力、测评活动形式）以及系统的观察与评价程序。该文从上述因素出发,综述了评价中心结构效度的相关研究,总结了提高评价中心结构效度的措施,并指出了未来的研究方向     

Effects of Situational Judgment Test Format on Reliability and Validity

Single-response situational judgment tests (SRSJTs) differ from multiple-response SJTs (MRSJTS) in that they present test takers with edited critical incidents and simply ask test takers to read over the action described and evaluate it according to its effectiveness. Research comparing the reliability and validity of SRSJTs and MRSJTs is thus far extremely limited. The study reported here directly compares forms of a SRSJT and MRSJT and explores the reliability, convergent validity, and predictive validity of each format. Results from this investigation present preliminary evidence to suggest SRSJTs may produce internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, and predictive validity estimates that are comparable to those achieved with many traditional MRSJTs. We conclude by discussing practical implications for personnel selection and assessment, and future research in psychological science more broadly.     

结构化面试预测效度的贡献成分分析

以情境面试和行为面试为主要形式的结构化面试,被广泛证明能够预测员工绩效,但其构念效度一直没被清晰地证明.面试的结构性、应聘者印象管理行为、动机、认知能力和人格特征等成分对结构化面试的预测效度都有积极贡献,这种对结构化面试预测效度贡献成分的分析有助于认清结构化面试的构念效度.未来的研究需关注结构化面试构念是否以人际技能为主,以及人际技能、动机、认知能力各自所占比重.     

Knowledge of Validity

What accounts for how we know that certain rules of reasoning, such as reasoning by Modus Ponens, are valid? If our knowledge of validity must be based on some reasoning, then we seem to be committed to the legitimacy of rule‐circular arguments for validity. This paper raises a new difficulty for the rule‐circular account of our knowledge of validity. The source of the problem is that, contrary to traditional wisdom, a universal generalization cannot be inferred just on the basis of reasoning about an arbitrary object. I argue in favor of a more sophisticated constraint on reasoning by universal generalization, one which undermines a rule‐circular account of our knowledge of validity.     

The Importance of Construct Validity in Consumer Research

Vosgerau, Scopelliti, and Huh (2020) question the construct validity of the most commonly used measures of self‐control and argue that many studies that claim to be examining self‐control may in fact be examining something else. In this comment, we generalize this argument and propose that this criticism could be leveraged against many other areas of consumer research. Indeed, many studies fail to properly establish the construct validity of their measures. Consequently, they may not be examining the construct they purport to be studying, which can lead to unreliable and conflicting findings.     

Validity generalization: Some critical remarks on the Schmidt-Hunter procedure*

This article presents some critical comments on the validity generalization procedure which has been presented by Schmidt, Hunter and others. They have put forward a method for testing the hypothesis that the variance in validity coefficients across situations for job-test combinations is due to what they consider to be statistical artifacts. The Schmidt-Hunter approach is criticized on the following points: the compilation of validity data, the use of criterion measures, and the test of the hypothesis of no situational specificity. Further, the relation between the concepts ‘situational specificity’ and ‘validity generalization’ is considered. In addition, it is noted that Schmidt, Hunter and others have defined the concept ‘situation’ in a different way than classical writers. It is concluded that the Schmidt-Hunter approach to validity generalization shows fundamental shortcomings. As a consequence their far-reaching conclusions for the practice of personnel selection should be considered premature.     

Longitudinal Predictive Validity of a Learning Potential Test

The aim of this article is to provide empirical psychometric evidence of the (longitudinal) predictive validity of a learning potential measure—the Learning Potential Computerised Adaptive Test (LPCAT)—in comparison with standard static tests with school aggregate results as the criterion measure. Participants were 79 boys (mean age 12.44, SD = 0.44) and 72 girls (mean age 11.18, SD = 0.42) attending two private schools. Correlation and regression analyses were used to evaluate the predictive validity of the learning potential and standard test scores for school aggregate academic results as criterion measure. Results indicate that learning potential scores were statistically significant predictors of aggregate academic results and provided results that were comparable to those of the standard test results—providing empirical support for the use of learning potential tests in mainstream educational settings.