Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Baldwin, Timothy T. en_US
dc.contributor.advisor Dreher, George F. en_US
dc.contributor.author Blume, Brian D. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2010-06-01T22:03:14Z
dc.date.available 2027-02-01T23:03:15Z
dc.date.available 2010-06-19T15:28:30Z
dc.date.issued 2010-06-01T22:03:14Z
dc.date.submitted 2006 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2022/7724
dc.description Thesis (PhD) - Indiana University, Business, 2006 en_US
dc.description.abstract Despite the evidence that assessment centers (ACs) are effective predictors of career advancement and job performance, considerable confusion remains regarding why this is the case. Traditional AC theory and practice suggest it is because the skill dimensions typically evaluated in ACs (e.g. such as critical thinking, organizing and planning, and stress tolerance) represent stable traits that can be assessed across various exercises (Sackett & Dreher, 1982). However, reviews of the empirical findings accumulated over the last 25 years show that correlations between different dimensions within exercises are larger than correlations of the same dimensions across exercises (Lance et al., 2004b). That is, participants tend to score higher on dimensions in one exercise but lower on all these dimensions in another exercise. Person-situation interactionist models suggest that these findings may be due to the interaction of individual differences and exercise characteristics (Lance et al, 2000; Schneider, 1983). Based on these models, exercise form (i.e. group interaction vs. individual presentation) and the competitive nature of the exercise were hypothesized to moderate the relationships between participants' individual difference variables (i.e. communication apprehension and collectivistic values) and their dimension scores. 282 students participated in oral presentation and group discussion exercises in an assessment center and were scored on their performance by trained raters on oral communication and critical thinking dimensions. Regression results indicated that participants' scores on critical thinking did vary across exercises depending on their communication apprehension. This demonstrates that performance is likely to vary across exercises depending on salient exercise characteristics and individual characteristics of the participants and can help explain the lack of construct validity reported in the assessment center literature (Lievens, Chasteen, Day, Christiansen, 2006). In addition, structural equation modeling results demonstrated that communication apprehension completely mediated the relationships between individuals' extraversion and emotional stability and their dimension scores. These data give insight into why extraversion and emotional stability have consistently been related to AC performance. The findings have implications for how developmental feedback is given to participants, how exercises are designed and selected, and how the communication requirements of exercises may influence participants' performance in ACs. en_US
dc.language.iso EN en_US
dc.publisher [Bloomington, Ind.] : Indiana University en_US
dc.subject Exercise Design en_US
dc.subject Assessment Center en_US
dc.subject Construct Validity en_US
dc.subject Developmental Feedback en_US
dc.subject Communication Apprehension en_US
dc.subject.classification Business Administration, Management en_US
dc.subject.classification Psychology, Industrial en_US
dc.title Construct Confusion and Assessment Centers: A Person-Situation Interactionist Perspective en_US
dc.type Doctoral Dissertation en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search IUScholarWorks


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account

Statistics