Lewati ke kontenScholarGate
PerpustakaanPerpustakaan sayaMejaReview StudioAsisten
Masuk
Situational Judgment Test/Bukti
Catatan bukti metode

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

Catatan sumber

Kutipan disalin apa adanya dari catatan sumber metode. Tidak ada verifikasi tingkat klaim yang disimpulkan darinya.

Situational Judgment Test (Scenario-Based Assessment of Work Judgment)
Catatan metode taksonomi · 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
Buka metode lengkap

Klaim yang dikurasi

Klaim tersimpan dalam buku besar bukti, masing-masing dengan penilaiannya sendiri.

Belum ada klaim yang dikurasi

Tampilan ini tidak menciptakan penilaian klaim ketika buku besar tidak memilikinya.

Metode terkait

Dihasilkan dari grafik metode dan ditampilkan sebagai relasi yang disarankan mesin — tidak ada klaim bukti yang disimpulkan.

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.

Status bukti

Sources recorded, not reviewed

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

Sumber

3 kutipan tercatat, disalin dari catatan sumber metode.

Tindakan

Buka halaman metode
ScholarGate

Perpustakaan rujukan berbasis konten untuk metode penelitian — apa itu setiap metode, bagaimana cara kerjanya, dan dari mana asalnya.

Data terbuka (CC-BY)

Jelajahi

  • Perpustakaan
  • Cari metode…
  • Jelajahi per bidang
  • Bidang
  • Perjalanan
  • Bandingkan
  • Metode yang mana?

Referensi

  • Bidang
  • Atlas
  • Glosarium
  • Metodologi
  • Filosofi

Ruang kerja

  • Perpustakaan saya
  • Meja
  • Obrolan

Perusahaan

  • Tentang
  • Harga
  • Kontak
  • Usulkan metode

Entri dihimpun dari sumber yang telah diterbitkan sebagai rujukan. Memverifikasi keakuratan dan kesesuaian setiap informasi untuk penggunaan Anda sendiri tetap menjadi tanggung jawab Anda.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Perpustakaan rujukan metode penelitian
  • Privasi
  • Kuki
Ketentuan
  • Hapus akun