Premium
Assessment Center Procedures: Cognitive Load During the Observation Phase
Author(s) -
Kolk Nanja J.,
Born Marise Ph.,
Van Der Flier Henk,
Olman Julliette M.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
international journal of selection and assessment
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.812
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1468-2389
pISSN - 0965-075X
DOI - 10.1111/1468-2389.00217
Subject(s) - inter rater reliability , psychology , reliability (semiconductor) , task (project management) , applied psychology , dual (grammatical number) , cognition , center (category theory) , social psychology , cognitive psychology , rating scale , developmental psychology , art , power (physics) , physics , chemistry , literature , management , quantum mechanics , neuroscience , economics , crystallography
This study explores the traditional procedure of observing assessment center exercises while taking notes vs. an alternative procedure where assessors merely observe and postpone note‐taking until immediately after the exercise. The first procedure is considered to be cognitively demanding due to the requirement of simultaneous note‐taking and observing. Also, dual task processing (concurrent observing and note‐taking) is considered to be especially demanding for assessors without rating experience. The procedures are evaluated using a 2 × 2 design (with note‐taking/without note‐taking × experienced/inexperienced). Some 121 experienced and inexperienced assessors rated videotaped candidates, observing either with or without taking notes. Results showed that experienced assessors yield significantly higher differential accuracy than inexperienced assessors. We did not find an effect of observation procedure on accuracy, interrater reliability or halo. Implications for future research are described.