A dual-process theory perspective to better understand judgments in assessment centers : the role of initial impressions for dimension ratings and validity
- Author
- Pia V. Ingold, Mirjam Donni and Filip Lievens (UGent)
- Organization
- Abstract
- Insight into assessors' initial impressions has the potential to advance knowledge on how assessors form dimension-based judgments and on possible biases in these ratings. Therefore, this study draws on dual process theory to build and test a model that integrates assessors' dimension ratings (i.e., systematic, slow, deliberate processing mode) with their initial impressions (i.e., intuitive, fast, automatic processing mode). Data collection started with an AC where assessors provided ratings of assessees, and an online survey of assessees' supervisors who rated their job performance. In addition, two other rater pools provided initial impressions of these assessees by evaluating extracted 2-min video clips of their AC performance. Initial impressions from both of these samples were positively related to assessors' dimension ratings, which supports assumptions from dual process theory and might explain why assessors' dimensional ratings are often undifferentiated. Initial impressions did not appear to open up the doors for biases and stereotypes based upon appearance and perceptions of liking. Instead, assessors picked up information that assessees transmitted about their personality (i.e., Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability). Implications for further research on initial impressions and AC dimension ratings are discussed.
- Keywords
- CRITERION-RELATED VALIDITY, 1ST IMPRESSIONS, METAANALYSIS, LIKING, PREDICTORS, INFERENCES, ACCURATE, CHOICE, assessment center, initial impression, dual process theory, rating, process, criterion-related validity
Downloads
-
(...).pdf
- full text
- |
- UGent only
- |
- |
- 238.80 KB
Citation
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication: http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-8606658
- MLA
- Ingold, Pia V., et al. “A Dual-Process Theory Perspective to Better Understand Judgments in Assessment Centers : The Role of Initial Impressions for Dimension Ratings and Validity.” JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, vol. 103, no. 12, Amer Psychological Assoc, 2018, pp. 1367–78, doi:10.1037/apl0000333.
- APA
- Ingold, P. V., Donni, M., & Lievens, F. (2018). A dual-process theory perspective to better understand judgments in assessment centers : the role of initial impressions for dimension ratings and validity. JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 103(12), 1367–1378. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000333
- Chicago author-date
- Ingold, Pia V., Mirjam Donni, and Filip Lievens. 2018. “A Dual-Process Theory Perspective to Better Understand Judgments in Assessment Centers : The Role of Initial Impressions for Dimension Ratings and Validity.” JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY 103 (12): 1367–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000333.
- Chicago author-date (all authors)
- Ingold, Pia V., Mirjam Donni, and Filip Lievens. 2018. “A Dual-Process Theory Perspective to Better Understand Judgments in Assessment Centers : The Role of Initial Impressions for Dimension Ratings and Validity.” JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY 103 (12): 1367–1378. doi:10.1037/apl0000333.
- Vancouver
- 1.Ingold PV, Donni M, Lievens F. A dual-process theory perspective to better understand judgments in assessment centers : the role of initial impressions for dimension ratings and validity. JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY. 2018;103(12):1367–78.
- IEEE
- [1]P. V. Ingold, M. Donni, and F. Lievens, “A dual-process theory perspective to better understand judgments in assessment centers : the role of initial impressions for dimension ratings and validity,” JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, vol. 103, no. 12, pp. 1367–1378, 2018.
@article{8606658,
abstract = {{Insight into assessors' initial impressions has the potential to advance knowledge on how assessors form dimension-based judgments and on possible biases in these ratings. Therefore, this study draws on dual process theory to build and test a model that integrates assessors' dimension ratings (i.e., systematic, slow, deliberate processing mode) with their initial impressions (i.e., intuitive, fast, automatic processing mode). Data collection started with an AC where assessors provided ratings of assessees, and an online survey of assessees' supervisors who rated their job performance. In addition, two other rater pools provided initial impressions of these assessees by evaluating extracted 2-min video clips of their AC performance. Initial impressions from both of these samples were positively related to assessors' dimension ratings, which supports assumptions from dual process theory and might explain why assessors' dimensional ratings are often undifferentiated. Initial impressions did not appear to open up the doors for biases and stereotypes based upon appearance and perceptions of liking. Instead, assessors picked up information that assessees transmitted about their personality (i.e., Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability). Implications for further research on initial impressions and AC dimension ratings are discussed.}},
author = {{Ingold, Pia V. and Donni, Mirjam and Lievens, Filip}},
issn = {{0021-9010}},
journal = {{JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY}},
keywords = {{CRITERION-RELATED VALIDITY,1ST IMPRESSIONS,METAANALYSIS,LIKING,PREDICTORS,INFERENCES,ACCURATE,CHOICE,assessment center,initial impression,dual process theory,rating,process,criterion-related validity}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{12}},
pages = {{1367--1378}},
publisher = {{Amer Psychological Assoc}},
title = {{A dual-process theory perspective to better understand judgments in assessment centers : the role of initial impressions for dimension ratings and validity}},
url = {{http://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000333}},
volume = {{103}},
year = {{2018}},
}
- Altmetric
- View in Altmetric
- Web of Science
- Times cited: