Assessment centers versus cognitive ability tests: Challenging the conventional wisdom on criterion-related validity (Sackett, Shewach, and Keiser, 2017)

Add this course to my shopping cart

Reference Title: Assessment centers versus cognitive ability tests: Challenging the conventional wisdom on criterion-related validity (Sackett, Shewach, and Keiser, 2017)
Author: Paul R. Sackett, Oren R. Shewach, and Heidi N. Keiser
Publication Type: Journal Article
Publication Date: 2017
Course Level: Advanced
Credits: 1
Price: $10.00
About This Course: This journal article considers the criterion-related validity for assessment centers (AC) and cognitive ability tests. Specificaly, they focused on samples in which both AC and ability scores are obtained for the same examinees and used to predict the same criterion, in an effort to control for differences in job type and in criteria that may have affected prior conclusions.
  1. Overview of this CE Home-Study Program
  2. Information About the Course
    1. Educational Objectives
    2. Target Audience
    3. Schedule
    4. Cost and Refund/Cancellation Policy
    5. Author Credentials
    6. Number of CE Credits Offered
    7. Location and Format
    8. Detailed Description of Program Material
  3. Conflict of Interest Statement

1. Overview of this CE program (top)

This home study course entails the independent study of "Assessment centers versus cognitive ability tests: Challenging the conventional wisdom on criterion-related validity" (Sackett, Shewach, and Keiser, 2017), followed by the completion of a multiple-choice test on-line. Participants who receive a passing grade of 75% or higher on the test will receive 1 CE credit. Failing participants may retake the test as often as they wish at no additional charge, and receive CE credit when they do pass.

A copy of the journal article for this course is available at the APA website.

More detailed information on the content of this article is given in section 2h below.

APR Testing Services is approved by the American Psychological Association to sponsor continuing education for psychologists. APR Testing Services maintains responsibility for this program and its content.

2.a Educational Objectives (top)

Upon completion of this home study program, the participant will be able to:

  1. State the hypothesis of this meta-analytic research.
  2. Describe how the methodology of this research differs from the methodology of previous similar meta-analyses.
  3. Describe the level of validity found for cognitive ability tests and assessment centers.
  4. Describe the reason that the current research findings are in conflict with the findings of past similar meta-analyses.
  5. Describe the effect that partialing out intelligence has on the validty of assessment centers.

2.b Target Audience (top)

This CE program is intended for psychologists who hold a doctoral degree. The course may be taken by other interested professionals (e.g.,senior human resource executives and consultants; upper-level managers).

2.c Schedule (top)

Access to program registration and post-test is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

2.d Cost and Refund/Cancellation Policy (top)

The fee for this home-study program is $10, which is $10 per CE credit. The fee is fully refundable for 60 days or until the post-test is taken, whichever comes first.

A copy of the journal article for this course is available at the APA website.

2.e Author Credentials (top)

The author of the journal article you will read for this home-study course is Dr. Paul Sackett. Dr. Sackett is a professor of psychology at The University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, MN.

2.f Number of CE Credits Offered (top)

Participants who complete this course by taking and passing the multiple-choice test will receive 1 CE credit.

2.g Location and Format (top)

This activity requires independent home-based study of Assessment centers versus cognitive ability tests: Challenging the conventional wisdom on criterion-related validity (Sackett, Shewach, and Keiser, 2017). Following completion of the reading material, participants complete an Internet-based multiple-choice post-test on the statement content.

2.h Detailed Description of Program Material (top)

Publication citation:

Sackett, Shewach, and Keiser (2017). Assessment centers versus cognitive ability tests: Challenging the conventional wisdom on criterion-related validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 1435–1447.. Retrieved July, 2018, from http://psycnet.apa.org/buy/2017-22555-001.

Article abstract:

Separate meta-analyses of the cognitive ability and assessment center (AC) literatures report higher criterion-related validity for cognitive ability tests in predicting job performance. We instead focus on 17 samples in which both AC and ability scores are obtained for the same examinees and used to predict the same criterion. Thus, we control for differences in job type and in criteria that may have affected prior conclusions. In contrast to Schmidt and Hunter’s (1998) meta-analysis, reporting mean validity of .51 for ability and .37 for ACs, we found using random-effects models mean validity of .22 for ability and .44 for ACs using comparable corrections for range restriction and measurement error in the criterion. We posit that 2 factors contribute to the differences in findings: (a) ACs being used on populations already restricted on cognitive ability and (b) the use of less cognitively loaded criteria in AC validation research.

3. Conflict of Interest Statement (top)

APR Testing Services (APR) has no known conflict of interest with respect to this CE program. APR has not received any commercial support for this CE program.