{"title":"以维度为基础的评估中心还是以任务为基础的评估中心？两种测量方法的直接比较研究","authors":"Ioana Bosneag, D. Iliescu","doi":"10.24837/pru.v22i1.545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates two divergent strategies for assessment center ratings, dimension-based assessment centers (DBAC) and task-based assessment centers (TBAC), in order to directly compare their model fit using the same data. The sample consisted of 126 Romanian students who took part in an Assessment and Development Center. The assessment center matrix included two exercises, analysis and in-tray, and two traditional dimensions, problem solving and organizing and planning, as well as one task-based dimension. Findings confirmed that the TBAC model performs significantly better than the DBAC model. Implications regarding the construct validity of TBAC ratings and internal reliability of DBAC ratings are discussed.","PeriodicalId":37470,"journal":{"name":"Psihologia Resurselor Umane","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dimension- or Task-based Assessment Centers? A direct comparison study of two measurement approaches\",\"authors\":\"Ioana Bosneag, D. Iliescu\",\"doi\":\"10.24837/pru.v22i1.545\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study investigates two divergent strategies for assessment center ratings, dimension-based assessment centers (DBAC) and task-based assessment centers (TBAC), in order to directly compare their model fit using the same data. The sample consisted of 126 Romanian students who took part in an Assessment and Development Center. The assessment center matrix included two exercises, analysis and in-tray, and two traditional dimensions, problem solving and organizing and planning, as well as one task-based dimension. Findings confirmed that the TBAC model performs significantly better than the DBAC model. Implications regarding the construct validity of TBAC ratings and internal reliability of DBAC ratings are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37470,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psihologia Resurselor Umane\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psihologia Resurselor Umane\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v22i1.545\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psihologia Resurselor Umane","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v22i1.545","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dimension- or Task-based Assessment Centers? A direct comparison study of two measurement approaches
This study investigates two divergent strategies for assessment center ratings, dimension-based assessment centers (DBAC) and task-based assessment centers (TBAC), in order to directly compare their model fit using the same data. The sample consisted of 126 Romanian students who took part in an Assessment and Development Center. The assessment center matrix included two exercises, analysis and in-tray, and two traditional dimensions, problem solving and organizing and planning, as well as one task-based dimension. Findings confirmed that the TBAC model performs significantly better than the DBAC model. Implications regarding the construct validity of TBAC ratings and internal reliability of DBAC ratings are discussed.
期刊介绍：
The Psihologia Resurselor Umane Journal is the official journal of the Association of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (APIO). PRU is devoted to publishing original investigations that contribute to an understanding of situational and individual challenges within an organizational context and that bring forth new knowledge in the field. The journal publishes primarily empirical articles and also welcomes methodological and theoretical articles on a broad range of topics covered by Organizational, Industrial, Work, Personnel and Occupational Health Psychology. Audience includes scholars, educators, managers, HR professionals, organizational consultants, practitioners in organizational and employee development.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
