Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Advanced

Designing selection systems for medicine: the importance of balancing predictive and political validity in high-stakes selection contexts

Fiona Patterson, Filip Lievens UGent, Máire Kerrin, Lara Zibarras and Bernd Carette (2012) INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT. 20(4). p.486-496
abstract
Selection into medical education and training is a high-stakes process. A key unanswered issue is the effectiveness of measuring noncognitive predictors via both low-fidelity and high-fidelity selection approaches in this high-stakes context. We review studies investigating the effectiveness of multiple selection instruments in terms of predictive validity, incremental validity, and applicant reactions in both entry-level and advanced-level medical selection. Our results show that the situational judgment test (SJT) is the best single predictor of performance, operationalized in multiple ways. In addition, the low-fidelity SJT has incremental predictive power over cognitively oriented tests, and high-fidelity assessment center (AC) exercises add incremental validity over the low-fidelity (and less costly) selection methods. Concerning applicant reactions, results show that overall, the selection system is positively received. However, the method with the highest predictive validity the SJT received comparatively lower face validity ratings which may present a justice dilemma for employers. Furthermore, various other stakeholders have a political interest in the selection methods used (e.g., government, the regulators and trade unions).
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
year
type
journalArticle (original)
publication status
published
subject
keyword
SITUATIONAL JUDGMENT TESTS, COLLEGE-STUDENT PERFORMANCE, APPLICANT REACTIONS, PERSONNEL-SELECTION, JOB-PERFORMANCE, FAIRNESS REACTIONS, GENERAL-PRACTICE, WIDENING PARTICIPATION, COGNITIVE-ABILITIES, EUROPEAN-COMMUNITY
journal title
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT
volume
20
issue
4
pages
486 - 496
Web of Science type
Article
Web of Science id
000311377600012
JCR category
MANAGEMENT
JCR impact factor
1.318 (2012)
JCR rank
83/172 (2012)
JCR quartile
2 (2012)
ISSN
0965-075X
DOI
10.1111/ijsa.12011
language
English
UGent publication?
yes
classification
A1
copyright statement
I have transferred the copyright for this publication to the publisher
id
3056034
handle
http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-3056034
date created
2012-11-21 08:57:01
date last changed
2016-12-19 15:37:03
@article{3056034,
  abstract     = {Selection into medical education and training is a high-stakes process. A key unanswered issue is the effectiveness of measuring noncognitive predictors via both low-fidelity and high-fidelity selection approaches in this high-stakes context. We review studies investigating the effectiveness of multiple selection instruments in terms of predictive validity, incremental validity, and applicant reactions in both entry-level and advanced-level medical selection. Our results show that the situational judgment test (SJT) is the best single predictor of performance, operationalized in multiple ways. In addition, the low-fidelity SJT has incremental predictive power over cognitively oriented tests, and high-fidelity assessment center (AC) exercises add incremental validity over the low-fidelity (and less costly) selection methods. Concerning applicant reactions, results show that overall, the selection system is positively received. However, the method with the highest predictive validity the SJT received comparatively lower face validity ratings which may present a justice dilemma for employers. Furthermore, various other stakeholders have a political interest in the selection methods used (e.g., government, the regulators and trade unions).},
  author       = {Patterson, Fiona and Lievens, Filip and Kerrin, M{\'a}ire and Zibarras, Lara and Carette, Bernd},
  issn         = {0965-075X},
  journal      = {INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT},
  keyword      = {SITUATIONAL JUDGMENT TESTS,COLLEGE-STUDENT PERFORMANCE,APPLICANT REACTIONS,PERSONNEL-SELECTION,JOB-PERFORMANCE,FAIRNESS REACTIONS,GENERAL-PRACTICE,WIDENING PARTICIPATION,COGNITIVE-ABILITIES,EUROPEAN-COMMUNITY},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {486--496},
  title        = {Designing selection systems for medicine: the importance of balancing predictive and political validity in high-stakes selection contexts},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12011},
  volume       = {20},
  year         = {2012},
}

Chicago
Patterson, Fiona, Filip Lievens, Máire Kerrin, Lara Zibarras, and Bernd Carette. 2012. “Designing Selection Systems for Medicine: The Importance of Balancing Predictive and Political Validity in High-stakes Selection Contexts.” International Journal of Selection and Assessment 20 (4): 486–496.
APA
Patterson, F., Lievens, F., Kerrin, M., Zibarras, L., & Carette, B. (2012). Designing selection systems for medicine: the importance of balancing predictive and political validity in high-stakes selection contexts. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, 20(4), 486–496.
Vancouver
1.
Patterson F, Lievens F, Kerrin M, Zibarras L, Carette B. Designing selection systems for medicine: the importance of balancing predictive and political validity in high-stakes selection contexts. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT. 2012;20(4):486–96.
MLA
Patterson, Fiona, Filip Lievens, Máire Kerrin, et al. “Designing Selection Systems for Medicine: The Importance of Balancing Predictive and Political Validity in High-stakes Selection Contexts.” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT 20.4 (2012): 486–496. Print.