Biomedical subjects

Chad H Van Iddekinge

Publications and source records attributed to Chad H Van Iddekinge.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Modeling error variance in job specification ratings: the influence of rater, job, and organization-level factors.

The authors modeled sources of error variance in job specification ratings collected from 3 levels of raters across 5 organizations (N=381). Variance components models were used to estimate the variance in ratings attributable to true score (variance between knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics [KSAOs]) and error (KSAO-by-rater and residual variance). Subsequent models partitioned error variance into components related to the organization, position level, and demographic characteristics of the raters. Analyses revealed that the differential ordering of KSAOs by raters was not a function of these characteristics but rather was due to unexplained rating differences among the raters. The implications of these results for job specification and validity transportability are discussed.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Assessing personality with a structured employment interview: construct-related validity and susceptibility to response inflation.

The authors evaluated the extent to which a personality-based structured interview was susceptible to response inflation. Interview questions were developed to measure facets of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability. Interviewers administered mock interviews to participants instructed to respond honestly or like a job applicant. Interviewees completed scales of the same 3 facets from the NEO Personality Inventory, under the same honest and applicant-like instructions. Interviewers also evaluated interviewee personality with the NEO. Multitrait-multimethod analysis and confirmatory factor analysis provided some evidence for the construct-related validity of the personality interviews. As for response inflation, analyses revealed that the scores from the applicant-like condition were significantly more elevated (relative to honest condition scores) for self-report personality ratings than for interviewer personality ratings. In addition, instructions to respond like an applicant appeared to have a detrimental effect on the structure of the self-report and interview ratings, but not interviewer NEO ratings.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Corrections for range restriction in structured interview ethnic group differences: the values may be larger than researchers thought.

Previous studies of standardized ethnic group differences in the employment interview have shown differences to be relatively small. Unfortunately, many researchers conducting interview studies have not considered the issue of range restriction in research design. This omission is likely to lead to underestimates of standardized ethnic group differences (d) when the interview is considered as an initial screening device or used in combination with other initial screening devices. The authors found that 2 forms of a behavioral interview were associated with standardized ethnic group differences of .36 and .56 when corrected for range restriction. These differences are substantially larger than previously thought and demonstrate the importance of considering a variety of study design characteristics in obtaining the appropriate parameter estimates.

Adult↗