IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v9y2016i01p34-38_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clearly Defined Constructs and Specific Situations Are the Currency of SJTs

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Lijun
  • Fan, Jinyan
  • Zheng, Lu
  • Hack, Elissa

Abstract

Although we echo Lievens and Motowidlo's (2016) view that situational judgment test (SJT) research should subscribe to the construct-driven approach, we disagree with their argument on two counts. First, we question whether measuring general domain knowledge represents the only way to advance SJT research. Second, we question whether it is appropriate to downplay the importance of situations in SJTs. In this commentary, we first briefly review construct-driven SJT studies and then share our own experience in developing an SJT for integrity in China using the construct-driven approach. Based on the review and reflection, we come to two major conclusions: (a) construct-driven SJT research has progressed well so far without the reconceptualization of SJTs as measures of general domain knowledge, and (b) specific situations are an important feature of SJTs that should not yet be dismissed.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Lijun & Fan, Jinyan & Zheng, Lu & Hack, Elissa, 2016. "Clearly Defined Constructs and Specific Situations Are the Currency of SJTs," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 34-38, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:9:y:2016:i:01:p:34-38_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1754942615001121/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:9:y:2016:i:01:p:34-38_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.