评价中心结构效度的多元概化理论分析研究

评价中心技术是现代人事测评的一种主要形式,主要通过多种模拟任务来测评高级管理人才。然而,少有研究能证明它具有理想的结构效度。该研究运用多质多法分析了某金融企业一次真实的评价中心测评项目,发现测评的结构效度并不理想。接着,通过多元概化理论的分析,探讨了结构效度不理想的原因,并指出了评价中心任务与所测维度之间的关系,以及对各维度的测量信度。最后,根据分析结果,探讨了优化评价中心结构效度和提升整体测量信度的途径。     

关于评价中心若干问题的探讨

本文对评价中心的定义、评价中心与心理测验的比较、评价中心的预测效度以及影响评价中心成功实施的原因等问题,进行了综合分析和初步探讨,从而帮助人们能够正确地认识评价中心,有效地使用评价中心;同时,也为人们对评价中心的研究和改革,提供了理论和实践方面的依据。     

评价中心的构想效度和结构模型

采用多质多法和验证性因素分析的方法,对以无领导小组讨论、文件筐和人格测验构成的一个评价中心的构想效度和结构模型进行了研究。通过对136名被试在四个测评维度上的施测,其结果表明,在评价中心中会聚效度低于区分效度,影响评价中心测评结果的主要因素是测评方法而不是测评维度,从而得到了一个以测评方法为潜变量的评价中心结构模型。从该结构模型来看,评价中心之所以起作用是由于其多个测评方法(情景)的结果。表明测评情景对于构建评价中心有着至关重要的作用。     

评价中心的评分维度和评分效果

对近年来国内外关于评价中心的研究进行了比较系统的介绍。首先,文章讨论了评分维度的数目对于评分结果的影响,以及评价中心中的4个元维度;其次,介绍了评价中心中衡量评分效果的指标,并讨论了评分者培训的分类及其对评分效果的影响;第三,虽然评价中心具有良好的效标关联效度,但对于其结构效度的研究至今尚无统一结论。最后,文章对评价中心未来的研究趋势进行了探讨。     

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     

评价中心——人事选用的新技术

评价中心(Assessment center)是人事心理学最近三十年来的主要发展领域之一,工业和组织心理学家对此颇感兴趣,进行了大量的研究和实践。众多的事实依据支持评价中心这一管理评定技术,它已成为一项有价值的研究技术和实用的人事评价工具。评价中心作为人事选择系统方法中的重要组成部分,具有一定的可靠性和有效性,它为充分利用人力资源,发挥人的潜在能力提供了一个良好的可能性和必要的手段。它的前景是宽广的。     

不同类型的测评维度对评价中心结构效度的影响研究

本研究将测评维度分为行为能力和心理特质两组,考察对评价中心结构效度的不同影响。A公司216名部门副经理级员工接受了本次管理素质评价中心测评,采用公文筐、角色扮演和无领导小组讨论三种方法,测查行为能力和心理特质两组维度,各自有三个维度被一种以上的方法测量。多质多法和验证性因素分析的结果表明,评价中心以行为能力比以心理特质为测评维度结构效度好;以行为能力为测评维度时,会聚效度和区分效度都较好。     

评价中心法在评价中心管理潜能中的应用及其结构效度检验

本文介绍了评价中心在我国企业评价干部管理潜能中的应用,并以公文处理法在四通集团公司管理人员测评中的应用为基础,运用因素分析法对其结构效度进行了检验。研究结论对评价中心的可行性作了肯定,并提出了值得进一步探讨的问题。     

评价中心测评的评分误差分析研究

本研究应用概化理论对评价中心中的评分误差控制问题进行了系统的分析探讨,得出了以下研究结论：(1)总体上,在评价中心(以LGD为例)测评中,评价员对研究设计的测评维度的评分基本反映了被试的真实能力水平,测量误差较小;(2)评价员对合作能力、应变能力和总体印象等维度的评价标准的理解具有较高的一致性,但对决策能力等维度的评价标准的理解存在一定的偏差;(3)在评价中心(以LGD为例)测评中,采用4名评价员能达到预期的测量目标,符合测评应用的经济性、有效性原则。     

评定和选拔管理人员的一种心理学方法—美国管理人员“评价中心”介绍

当前在评定和选拔管理人员方面,美国联邦政府的一些部门和几百个著名的美国公司使用着称其为“评价中心”(Assessment Center)的工作方法,如美国电报电话公司,美国通用电气公司、美国福特汽车公司、俄亥俄标准石油公司,美国商业机器公司、银行家托拉斯、柯达公司、梅里尔、伦契投资公司、西尔斯商行的及美国联邦政府的人事管理局(OPM)、农业部等部门都设有“评价中心”以开展各自系统管理人员的评定和选拔工作,“评价中心”的工作方法在许多部门、许多行业中得到了很大的成功,现在受到越来越多的人的重视。“评价     

The use of structured multi-domain job analysis for the construction of assessment center methods and procedures

This article addresses the defensibility of the assessment center based on a content oriented validation strategy. One reason for the confusion in this area is the fact that there are no agreed upon methods for constructing the assessment procedures. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to describe how structured multi-domain job analysis information can be used to develop an assessment center which is well grounded with regard to content validity.     

Guidelines and Ethical Considerations for Assessment Center Operations1

This document is an update of several prior editions of guidelines and ethical considerations for assessment center operations dating back to 1975. Each set of guidelines was developed and endorsed by specialists in the research, development, and implementation of assessment centers. The guidelines are a statement of the considerations believed to be most important for all users of the assessment center method. For instance, the use of job‐related simulations is a core concept when using the method. Job simulation exercises allow individuals to demonstrate their abilities in situations that are important on the job. As stressed in these guidelines, a procedure should not be represented as an assessment center unless it includes at least one, and usually several, job‐related simulations that require the assessee to demonstrate a constructed behavioral response. Other important areas include assessor selection and training, using ‘competencies’ as dimensions to be assessed, validation, participants' rights, and the incorporation of technology into assessment center programs. The current guidelines discuss a number of considerations in developing and using assessment centers in diverse cultural settings.     

Path-Referenced Assessment: A Guide for Instructional Management

Path-referenced assessment is considered as an innovative attempt to move closer to the sought-after goal of making assessment directly relevant to instructional concerns of all learners including the handicapped. The technology of this rapidly developing form of assessment allows determination to be made about educational progress of learners resulting from instruction. In this article, the nature of path-referenced assessment is described, its relationships to instructional management is delineated, and how path-referenced assessment relates to adaptive measurement systems is considered.     

Persons and humans: refashioning ourselves in a better image and likeness

Abstract. This article argues that there are neither moral considerations that in principle forbid the development or use of recom-binant DNA technology, nor grounds to hold that its application is likely to cause more harm than good. A defensible moral position would enjoin a prudent assessment of consequences, rather than an absolute prohibition. The technology may remain controversial because it presupposes the difference between being a person, an entity who can evaluate and manipulate its own biological structure, and human-ness as a biological structure likely to be the subject of engineering over the long-range future.     

Critique of Sharif’s and Pitt’s Models of Technology

abstract

In this article Pitt’s and Sharif’s models of technology are discussed. These models are based on two different conceptions of technology, which are technology as “instrument” and as “making use of instrument.” Sharif considers technology as a collection of empowering tools, including technoware, humanware, infoware and orgaware. On the other hand, Pitt sees technology as “humanity at work.” Based on his definition, Pitt proposes a model of technology with three components; first-order transformation, second-order transformation, and the assessment of feedback mechanism. In this article this model will be explained and criticized. After that, Sharif’s model is criticized in the light of Pitt’s theory and it will be shown that Pitt’s model provides a better understanding of different aspects of technology. For example, it will be argued how Pitt’s model is efficient in explaining dynamicity, transfer and control of technology along with its soft dimensions, while Sharif’s model is incapable of doing so. In the next part, Pitt’s model is criticized and it is shown that the mechanism of knowledge progress suggested by this model is controversial and Pitt’s framework cannot support the idea of indigenous technology. Furthermore, the ability of Pitt’s model in describing different technological phenomena is called into question, since this model provides a superficial view of the complexity of an assessment of technology’s consequences. Finally, a list is proposed that contains minimal requirements that every model of technology is expected to explain. It is incumbent on technology theoreticians to consider this list.     

INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT CENTER METHODS ON ASSESSORS'RATINGS

Recently a number of authors have argued persuasively that performance ratings are influenced to a large extent by the way the rater selects, organizes, stores, and recalls information. Although the influence of the rater's cognitive processes on the obtained ratings has been considered in the job-performance evaluation literature, this issue has not been considered in the assessment center literature. The purpose of the present study was to examine how assessment center methods affect the way assessors organize and process assessment center information and affect the ratings they make. Independent groups of assessors underwent one of two methods for evaluating candidates in an assessment center. Data indicated differences in the convergent and discriminant validities and differences in the factor structures of the ratings for the two methods. The pattern of results suggested that the two methods for evaluating assessment center candidates affected the way the assessors organized the assessment center information and affected the obtained ratings. Future research should consider assessment center methods and assessors as sources of variation in assessment center ratings.     

The use of virtual reality in the study, assessment, and treatment of body image in eating disorders and nonclinical samples: a review of the literature

This article reviews research into the use of virtual reality in the study, assessment, and treatment of body image disturbances in eating disorders and nonclinical samples. During the last decade, virtual reality has emerged as a technology that is especially suitable not only for the assessment of body image disturbances but also for its treatment. Indeed, several virtual environment-based software systems have been developed for this purpose. Furthermore, virtual reality seems to be a good alternative to guided imagery and in vivo exposure, and is therefore very useful for studies that require exposure to life-like situations but which are difficult to conduct in the real world. Nevertheless, review highlights the lack of published controlled studies and the presence of methodological drawbacks that should be considered in future studies. This article also discusses the implications of the results obtained and proposes directions for future research.     

EXAMINING SELECTION UTILITY WHERE COMPETING PREDICTORS DIFFER IN ADVERSE IMPACT

This paper discusses the roles of validity, cut score choice, and adverse impact on selection system utility using data from two concurrent validation studies. We contrast an assessment center and published aptitude test on several metrics, including validity, testing costs, adverse impact, and utility. The assessment center produced slightly lower validity than the aptitude test while costing roughly 10 times as much per candidate. In spite of these advantages for the aptitude test, the assessment center produced so much less adverse impact its operational utility would be higher given cut scores likely to be chosen in this organization. Potential concerns with applying net utility models to this type of situation are discussed in comparison to gross utility models.