• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Applied Psychology >Clarifying the Contribution of Assessee-, Dimension-, Exercise-, and Assessor-Related Effects to Reliable and Unreliable Variance in Assessment Center Ratings
【24h】

Clarifying the Contribution of Assessee-, Dimension-, Exercise-, and Assessor-Related Effects to Reliable and Unreliable Variance in Assessment Center Ratings

机译：澄清评估中心等级中评估者，维度，运动和评估者相关影响对可靠和不可靠方差的贡献

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Though considerable research has evaluated the functioning of assessment center (AC) ratings, surprisingly little research has articulated and uniquely estimated the components of reliable and unreliable variance that underlie such ratings. The current study highlights limitations of existing research for estimating components of reliable and unreliable variance in AC ratings. It provides a comprehensive empirical decomposition of variance in AC ratings that: (a) explicitly accounts for assessee-, dimension-, exercise-, and assessor-related effects, (b) does so with 3 large sets of operational data from a multiyear AC program, and (c) avoids many analytic limitations and confounds that have plagued the AC literature to date. In doing so, results show that (a) the extant AC literature has masked the contribution of sizable, substantively meaningful sources of variance in AC ratings, (b) various forms of assessor bias largely appear trivial, and (c) there is far more systematic, nuanced variance present in AC ratings than previous research indicates. Furthermore, this study also illustrates how the composition of reliable and unreliable variance heavily depends on the level to which assessor ratings are aggregated (e.g., overall AC-level, dimension-level, exercise-level) and the generalizations one desires to make based on those ratings. The implications of this study for future AC research and practice are discussed.
机译：尽管有大量研究评估了评估中心（AC）评级的功能，但令人惊讶的是，很少有研究明确指出和独特地评估了构成这些评级的可靠和不可靠方差的组成部分。当前的研究突显了现有研究在估计交流额定值的可靠和不可靠方差方面的局限性。它提供了AC评级方差的综合经验分解，该分解为：（a）明确说明与被评估者，规模，锻炼和评估者相关的影响，（b）使用来自多年AC的3套大型运营数据进行（c）避免了迄今为止困扰AC文献的许多分析限制和混淆。这样做的结果表明，（a）现有的交流文献掩盖了交流评分中大量有意义的实质性差异来源，（b）各种形式的评估者偏见在很大程度上显得微不足道，并且（c）还有更多与以前的研究相比，AC评级中存在系统的，细微的差异。此外，这项研究还说明了可靠和不可靠方差的构成如何严重取决于评估者评级的汇总级别（例如，总体AC级别，维度级别，练习级别）以及人们希望基于其进行的概括这些等级。讨论了本研究对未来AC研究和实践的意义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号