Σύγκριση μεθόδων

	Situational Judgment Test	Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales
Πεδίο	Οργανωσιακή Συμπεριφορά	Οργανωσιακή Συμπεριφορά
Οικογένεια	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Έτος προέλευσης	1990	1963
Δημιουργός	Stephan Motowidlo, Marvin Dunnette & Gary Carter	Patricia Cain Smith & L. M. Kendall
Τύπος	Scenario-based judgment measurement procedure	Behaviorally anchored performance-rating scale construction
Θεμελιώδης πηγή	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.	Smith, P. C., & Kendall, L. M. (1963). Retranslation of expectations: An approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47(2), 149-155.
Εναλλακτικές ονομασίες	SJT, Situational Judgment Inventory, Low-Fidelity Simulation, Scenario-Based Test	BARS, Behavioral Expectation Scales, Smith-Kendall Scales, Behaviorally Anchored Scales
Συναφείς	3	3
Σύνοψη	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.	Behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) are performance-appraisal instruments whose scale points are defined by concrete examples of job behavior rather than by vague adjectives like 'good' or 'excellent.' Patricia Cain Smith and L. M. Kendall introduced the method in 1963 with their technique of retranslation of expectations, a procedure for constructing unambiguous behavioral anchors. The core problem they tackled is that ordinary rating scales leave raters to guess what each numerical point means, so that one supervisor's 4 is another's 2, fatally undermining reliability and fairness. BARS solves this by attaching specific behavioral descriptions, drawn from critical incidents and vetted by independent expert judges, to each level of each performance dimension. The construction process is deliberately participatory and quantitative, which both improves measurement and builds rater understanding. BARS became one of the most influential and widely studied formats in performance appraisal.