King's College London

Research portal

Subgroup differences in situational judgment test scores: Evidence from large applicant samples

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Christoph N. Herde, Filip Lievens, Duncan J. R. Jackson, Ali Shalfrooshan, Philip L. Roth

Original languageEnglish
JournalInternational Journal of Selection and Assessment
Early online date21 Oct 2019
DOIs
Accepted/In press17 Sep 2019
E-pub ahead of print21 Oct 2019

Documents

King's Authors

Abstract

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.

Download statistics

No data available

View graph of relations

© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454