Gå til indholdScholarGate
BibliotekMit bibliotekSkrivebordReview StudioAssistent
Log ind
Situational Judgment Test/Bevis
Metodebevisregistrering

Situational Judgment Test

A situational judgment test (SJT) is a personnel-assessment method that presents candidates with realistic work scenarios and a set of possible responses, then measures their judgment about what action is most effective. Stephan Motowidlo, Marvin Dunnette, and Gary Carter introduced the modern form in 1990 as a low-fidelity simulation, capturing the predictive power of work samples and assessment centers at a fraction of the cost by describing situations in writing rather than staging them. SJTs sit between abstract trait tests and full behavioral simulations, sampling the judgment that effective performance requires while remaining scalable and standardized. McDaniel, Hartman, Whetzel, and Grubb's 2007 meta-analysis established their criterion-related validity and showed that response instructions shape what they measure. Weekley and Ployhart's 2006 edited volume gave the field a comprehensive theoretical and practical treatment. SJTs are now widely used in selection across managerial, medical, and customer-facing roles.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegistrering

Citater kopieret ordret fra metodens kilderegistrering. Ingen påstandsniveauverifikation er udledt heraf.

Situational Judgment Test (Scenario-Based Assessment of Work Judgment)
Taksonomisk metoderegistrering · process-pipeline / organizational-behavior
  • Motowidlo, S. J., Dunnette, M. D., & Carter, G. W. (1990). An alternative selection procedure: The low-fidelity simulation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6), 640-647. · DOI 10.1037/0021-9010.75.6.640
  • McDaniel, M. A., Hartman, N. S., Whetzel, D. L., & Grubb, W. L. (2007). Situational judgment tests, response instructions, and validity: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60(1), 63-91. · DOI 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00065.x
  • Weekley, J. A., & Ployhart, R. E. (Eds.). (2006). Situational Judgment Tests: Theory, Measurement, and Application. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. · ISBN 9780805852516
Åbn fuld metode

Kuraterede påstande

Påstande gemt i bevis-loggen, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterede påstande endnu

Denne visning opfinder ikke en påstandsvurdering, når loggen ingen har.

Relaterede metoder

Genereret fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinelt foreslåede relationer — ingen bevispåstand er udledt.

Same method familyAssessment Center Methodmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyBehaviorally Anchored Rating Scalesmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyCritical Incident Techniquemachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Kilder

3 registrerede citater, kopieret fra metodens kilderegistrering.

Handlinger

Åbn metodeside
ScholarGate

Et indholdsfokuseret opslagsbibliotek over forskningsmetoder — hvad hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åbne data (CC-BY)

Opdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søg i metoder…
  • Gennemse efter fagområde
  • Fagområder
  • Rejse
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Reference

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodologi
  • Filosofi

Arbejdsområde

  • Mit bibliotek
  • Skrivebord
  • Chat

Virksomhed

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Posterne er sammenstillet fra publicerede kilder til reference. Det er dit eget ansvar at kontrollere, at oplysningerne er korrekte og egnede til din anvendelse.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et opslagsbibliotek over forskningsmetoder
  • Privatliv
  • Cookies
  • Vilkår
  • Slet konto