Popular or unpopular? Therapists' use of structured interviews and their estimation of patient acceptance

An accurate diagnosis is an important precondition for effective psychotherapeutic treatment. The use of structured interviews provides the gold standard for reliable diagnosis. Suppiger et al. (2009) showed that structured interviews have a high acceptance among patients. On a scale from 0 (not at all satisfied) to 100 (totally satisfied) patients rated overall satisfaction with a structured interview at M = 86.55. Nevertheless, therapists rarely seem to use structured interviews in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess how frequently therapists use structured interviews in daily practice. Secondly, we hypothesized that therapists underestimate patient acceptance of structured interviews. As a third goal, we explored further reasons why therapists choose not to use structured interviews. We conducted an online survey of 1,927 psychiatrists and psychotherapists in Switzerland and asked them how frequently they used structured interviews and how they estimated patient satisfaction with these interviews. Furthermore, we asked therapists why they chose to use or not use structured interviews. Therapists reported using structured interviews on average with about 15% of their patients. Furthermore, therapists estimated significantly lower patient acceptance than patients themselves indicated (M_therapist = 49.41, M_patient = 86.55). Our data suggest lack of familiarity with these instruments as well as an overestimation of the utility of open clinical interviews as further reasons for not using structured interviews.     

Need for Autonomy and Resistance to Standardized Employee Selection Practices

Two experiments used a hypothetical hiring scenario to examine (a) how standardizing employee selection practices affects decision makers’ perceptions of autonomy potential, and (b) if increasing the level of autonomy inherent in standardized practices reduces decision makers’ reluctance to use them. The results of Experiment 1 suggest that decision makers perceived the structured interview and the mechanical approach to data combination as having less autonomy potential than their unstructured and intuition-based counterparts. The results of Experiment 2 suggest that the amount of autonomy inherent in a structured interview and a mechanical data combination procedure significantly affected decision makers’ intentions to use them. Together, these findings provide empirical support for the notion that autonomy is an important factor contributing to people’s reluctance to use standardized selection practices and that standardized practices may be modified to enhance people’s perceptions of autonomy and subsequent use intentions. Individual differences relating to perceptions of autonomy potential are also identified.     

Understanding the Academic–Practitioner Gap for Structured Interviews: ‘Behavioral’ interviews diffuse, ‘structured’ interviews do not

Recent studies about the academic–practitioner gap suggest that the nonadoption of evidenced‐based practices can be explained by their diffusion through practitioner‐oriented literature. This study extends these findings by investigating the case of the structured interview, which has not been widely adopted by practitioners despite its good psychometric properties. Using a social representations approach, we investigate how the academic concepts of ‘structured’ and ‘behavioral’ interviewing are diffused to practitioners in advice books. Results show that ‘behavioral’ interviews diffuse while ‘structured’ interviews do not, and that different arguments are used to describe these concepts. Facilitating the diffusion of structured interview practices requires academics to rethink their ways of communicating with practitioners through media.     

Preselection Methods Prior to the Internal Assessment Center for Personnel Selection in German Companies

Companies frequently use preselection methods in order to identify eligible candidates before conducting assessment centers (ACs). The present study was the first to investigate current practices of preselection in German companies that use ACs for internal selection. Results of a survey among 109 German companies show that companies typically apply general qualification criteria (e.g., work experience), appraisals, or unstructured interviews for preselection, but rely less on trait‐oriented methods (e.g., intelligence tests) and structured interviews. In their subjective evaluations, however, companies rate structured interviews and trait‐oriented methods as particularly valid methods. The results also show that the number of preselection methods used is positively correlated with company size, diagnostic skills of the responsible persons in the preselection, and DIN (Deutsches Institut für Normierung [German Institute for Standardization]) 33430 certification status. The implications of these findings for practice and research are discussed.     

The Use of Structured Clinical Interviews for Assessment in Counseling

The purpose of this article is twofold: to summarize some of the major issues concerning structured clinical interviews and to review data available on some of the most widely used interview schedules. One of the key challenges with the practitioner—scientist approach to counseling is the ability to compare information from a variety of clients and counselors. A structured clinical interview can be considered an empirically driven instrument that has preestablished questions and scoring procedures that make it a useful assessment tool. Through its use, comparisons can be made among clients, and the reliability of assessment and diagnosis can be increased.     

SELECTION INTERVIEWING IN THE LIFE INSURANCE INDUSTRY: AN UPDATE OF RESEARCH AND PRACTICE

Over the past decade, the Life Insurance Marketing and Research Association has been researching and implementing the use of structured selection interviews in the agent selection process. The practical problems encountered during this period are reviewed, and studies of the most recent interview guide are presented. These studies are based on interview evaluations made by 270 managers in interview training sessions, as well as field managers'evaluations of 163 applicants in actual agent selection situations. The results indicate that it is possible for managers to agree on their evaluation ratings of an applicant, that there is a stable factorial structure for the ratings, and that the ratings are related to the selection decision although not all items carry the same weight. The implications of these results for the use of structured selection interviews and for further research are discussed.     

Standardizing DSM-IV Diagnoses: The Clinical Applications of Structured Interviews

Psychological assessments of Axis I and Axis II diagnoses are strongly enhanced by the use of structured interviews. Structured interviews standardize the clinical inquiries, sequencing of diagnostic issues, and criterion-based ratings. For a broad range of clinical settings, structured interviews can systematically assess changes in patient status, corroborative data from multiple sources, interrater and test-retest reliability, and diagnostic validity. This article outlines the potential uses of different diagnostic interviews that are tailored for or adapted to specific clinical purposes.     

Standardizing DSM-IV diagnoses: the clinical applications of structured interviews

Psychological assessments of Axis I and Axis II diagnoses are strongly enhanced by the use of structured interviews. Structured interviews standardize the clinical inquiries, sequencing of diagnostic issues, and criterion-based ratings. For a broad range of clinical settings, structured interviews can systematically assess changes in patient status, corroborative data from multiple sources, interrater and test-retest reliability, and diagnostic validity. This article outlines the potential uses of different diagnostic interviews that are tailored for or adapted to specific clinical purposes.     

Transparency in Structured Interviews: Consequences for Construct and Criterion-Related Validity

Although researchers agree on the use of structured interviews in personnel selection, past research has been undecided on whether these interviews need to be conducted nontransparently (i.e., without giving interviewees any indication of the evaluated criteria) or transparently (i.e., by revealing to interviewees the dimensions assessed in the interview). This article presents two independent studies examining the effects of interview transparency on interviewees' performance and on the interview's construct and criterion-related validity in the context of an application training program. Results from both Study 1 (N = 123) and Study 2 (N = 269) indicate an improvement in interviewees' performance under transparent interview conditions. Both studies further support the assumption that transparent interviews show satisfactory construct validity, whereas nontransparent interviews do not. Moreover, Study 2 showed no significant difference between the interview's criterion-related validity under transparent versus nontransparent conditions. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.     

THE INCREMENTAL VALIDITY OF INTERVIEW SCORES OVER AND ABOVE COGNITIVE ABILITY AND CONSCIENTIOUSNESS SCORES

Recent research has suggested that scores on measures of cognitive ability, measures of Conscientiousness, and interview scores are positively correlated with job performance. There remains, however, a question of incremental validity: To what extent do interviews predict above and beyond cognitive ability and Conscientiousness? This question was addressed in this paper by (a) conducting meta‐analyses of the relationships among cognitive ability, Conscientiousness, and interviews, (b) combining these results with predictive validity results from previous meta‐analyses to form a “meta‐correlation matrix” representing the relationships among cognitive ability, Conscientiousness, interviews, and job performance, and (c) performing 9 hierarchical regressions to examine the incremental validity of 3 levels of structured interviews in best, actual, and worst case scenarios for prediction. Results suggested that interview scores contribute to the prediction of job performance over and above cognitive ability and Conscientiousness to the extent that they are structured, with scores from highly structured interviews contributing substantially to prediction. Directions for future research are discussed.     

Predicting Training and Job Performance for Transit Operators

Although considerable meta‐analytic research has validated the use of cognitive ability tests, structured interviews, and personality tests with training and job performance criteria, few studies have investigated the validity of these measures with transit operators. There are the only two single studies of concurrent validation research specifically with transit operators. This article presents the results of a predictive validation study conducted with transit operator applicants for a large urban transit authority in Canada. Key knowledge, skills, and abilities were determined for the role and used as a basis for the design and choice of predictors and criteria. Four predictors were used in the study: education, cognitive ability, personality assessment, and structured interview. Criteria included training performance (formative and summative), probationary performance, preventable accidents, and lost time injuries. Validation results supported cognitive ability, structured interview, and several personality factors as predictors of training performance, but less so for job performance. The use of formative training ratings greatly augmented the evidence supporting the predictors beyond typical organizational criteria.     

The use of impression management tactics in structured interviews: a function of question type?

This study investigated impression management tactic use during structured interviews containing both experience-based and situational questions. Specifically, the authors examined whether applicants' use of impression management tactics depended on question type. Results from 119 structured interviews indicated that almost all of the applicants used some form of impression management. Significantly more assertive than defensive impression management tactics were used, and among assertive tactics, applicants tended to use self-promotion rather than ingratiation. However, different question types prompted the use of different impression management tactics. Ingratiation tactics were used significantly more when applicants answered situational questions, whereas self-promotion tactics were used significantly more when applicants answered experience-based questions. Furthermore, the use of self-promotion and ingratiation tactics was positively related to interviewer evaluations.     

Comparative Analysis of Suicide,Accidental, and Undetermined Cause of Death Classification

Suicide determination is not standardized across medical examiners, and many suspected suicides are later classified as accidental or undetermined. The present study investigated patterns between these three groups using a medical examiner database and 633 structured interviews with next of kin. There were similarities across all three classification groups, including rates of mental illness and psychiatric symptoms. Those classified suicide were more likely to be male, to have died in a violent fashion, and have a stronger family history of suicide. Chronic pain was very common across all three groups, but significantly higher in the accidental and undetermined groups.     

中层管理人员结构化面试测评效度的现场研究

通过对某上市公司随机抽取的43位中层管理人员素质测评的现场研究,探讨结构化面试的信度效度问题。研究设计基于岗位分析与关键事件分析,采用3人小组面试的方法,同时实施情景面试与行为描述面试,综合测评被试岗位胜任能力。分析结果表明,评委要素评价内部一致性和评委间内部一致性都比较高,并与面试半年后上级评定的任务绩效和总体绩效显著相关,结构化面试具有较高的信度与预测效度。进一步比较情景面试和行为描述面试发现,这两种结构化面试有类似的信度,但是行为描述面试具有更高的效度。     

Assessment of generalized anxiety disorder diagnostic criteria in the National Comorbidity Survey and Virginia Adult Twin Study of Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders

The authors investigated measurement properties of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) criteria in the National Comorbidity Survey and the Virginia Adult Twin Study of Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders (VATSPSUD). The two studies used different widely used instruments. There were significant (p < .001) differences in measurement of GAD due to age, study, and age-study interaction on item thresholds and factor loadings of GAD, especially when different stem-probe structures of interviews were taken into account. Item thresholds were estimated to differ by as much as -.74 as a function of age and .40 as a function of study. Despite these differences, factor scores derived from symptom criteria strongly predicted categorical diagnostic outcomes based on symptom count. It is concluded that interview structure, especially the stem-probe format of structured interviews, and wording had significant effects on study findings; that future studies in psychiatric epidemiology should use common structured interviews as much as possible; and that factor scores can be used in conjunction with sum scores as cut points to retain the advantages of both dimensional and categorical classification.     

Telling stories to communicate the value of the pre‐employment structured job interview

In an effort to bridge the scientist–practitioner gap in the employee selection, some researchers have advocated telling stories to better communicate the value of evidence‐based hiring practices to human resource (HR) professionals. In this paper, we conducted two experiments that examine the efficacy of storytelling for overcoming managers’ resistance to use structured job interviews. In two experiments, we found that participants who read a story regarding the effectiveness of structured interviews, as opposed to receiving evidence‐based advice, reported more favorable attitudes toward structured job interviews. Serial mediation analysis revealed that the observed attitude change was mediated by an increase in narrative transportation and reduction in counterarguing. Implications for using stories in communicating the value of evidence‐based HR practices are discussed.     

A counterintuitive hypothesis about employment interview validity and some supporting evidence

This study found mixed support for the hypothesis that the difference in criterion-related validity between unstructured and structured employment interviews is due solely to the greater reliability of structured interviews. Using data from prior meta-analyses, this hypothesis was tested in 4 data sets by using standard psychometric procedures to remove the effects of measurement error in interview scores from correlations with rated job performance and training performance. In the 1st data set. support was found for this hypothesis. However, in a 2nd data set structured interviews had higher true score correlations with performance ratings, and in 2 other data sets unstructured interviews had higher true score correlations. We also found that averaging across 3 to 4 independent unstructured interviews provides the same level of validity for predicting job performance as a structured interview administered by a single interviewer. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.     

Selection Interview: A Review of Validity Evidence,Adverse Impact and Applicant Reactions

This article is focused on the evidence related to the criterion and construct validity of interview, its adverse impact on minority groups and the applicant reactions. Based on the content of the questions included in personnel interview, two types of interview made by found: conventional structured interview and behavioural structured interview. With regard to criterion validity, evidence shows that, in general, interviews may be used to predict job performance and, specifically, behavioural structured interviews show the highest validity coefficients. Although construct validity was less well investigated, there is currently a number of studies carried out in order to clarify what constructs are assessed by interviews. It was shown that conventional structured interviews and behavioural structured interviews clearly measure different constructs. With regard to group differences, interviews show only a small adverse impact, but this impact decreases if behavioural structured interviews are used. In connection with applicant reactions, more negative applicant reactions appear with behavioural structured interviews than conventional structured interviews. Practical implications and future lines of research are suggested.