Premium
Subgroup differences in situational judgment test scores: Evidence from large applicant samples
Author(s) -
Herde Christoph N.,
Lievens Filip,
Jackson Duncan J. R.,
Shalfrooshan Ali,
Roth Philip L.
Publication year - 2020
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/ijsa.12269
Subject(s) - psychology , situational ethics , diversity (politics) , personnel selection , subgroup analysis , social psychology , test (biology) , statistics , mathematics , political science , confidence interval , paleontology , law , biology
To promote diversity in organizations it is important to have accurate knowledge about subgroup differences associated with selection procedures. However, current estimates of subgroup differences in situational judgment tests (SJTs) are overwhelmingly based on range‐restricted incumbent samples that are downwardly biased. This study provides much‐needed applicant level estimates of SJT subgroup differences ( N = 37,530). As a key finding, Black‐White differences ( d = 0.66) were higher than in incumbent samples ( d = 0.38). Overall, sex differences were small. Females scored higher for management jobs ( d = −0.13) and males scored higher for administrative jobs ( d = 0.15). By analyzing applicant samples that do not suffer from range restriction, this study adds knowledge about subgroup differences in SJTs.