Comparer des méthodes

	Situational Judgment Test	Critical Incident Technique
Domaine	Comportement organisationnel	Comportement organisationnel
Famille	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Année d'origine	1990	1954
Auteur d'origine	Stephan Motowidlo, Marvin Dunnette & Gary Carter	John C. Flanagan
Type	Scenario-based judgment measurement procedure	Qualitative behavior-elicitation and classification procedure
Source fondatrice	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.	Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51(4), 327-358.
Alias	SJT, Situational Judgment Inventory, Low-Fidelity Simulation, Scenario-Based Test	CIT, Flanagan Critical Incident Technique, Critical Incidents Method, Critical Incident Analysis
Apparentées	3	3
Résumé	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.	The critical incident technique (CIT) is a qualitative procedure for studying human behavior by collecting and classifying detailed accounts of specific incidents in which behavior was especially effective or ineffective in achieving an aim. John Flanagan introduced it in his landmark 1954 Psychological Bulletin article, drawing on his work selecting and classifying aircrew in World War II, where vague trait descriptions had proved useless and concrete behavioral accounts proved decisive. Rather than asking people for opinions or generalities, CIT asks observers to recount what actually happened, what the person did, and why it mattered, then builds a framework of behavioral requirements inductively from those accounts. The technique gave applied psychology a rigorous, replicable way to derive job requirements, performance criteria, and training content from real behavior. It remains a foundational method underlying job analysis, behaviorally anchored rating scales, and competency modeling. Its hallmark is grounding abstract requirements in observable, situated action.