방법 비교

	Situational Judgment Test	Assessment Center Method
분야	조직행동론	조직행동론
계열	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
기원 연도	1990	1982
창시자	Stephan Motowidlo, Marvin Dunnette & Gary Carter	George C. Thornton III & William C. Byham
유형	Scenario-based judgment measurement procedure	Behavioral selection and development assessment procedure
원전	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.	Thornton, G. C., III, & Byham, W. C. (1982). Assessment Centers and Managerial Performance. Academic Press. ISBN: 9780126906202
별칭	SJT, Situational Judgment Inventory, Low-Fidelity Simulation, Scenario-Based Test	Assessment Centers, AC Method, Development Center, Multiple-Exercise Assessment
관련	3	3
요약	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 assessment center method evaluates people, most often candidates for managerial roles, by observing their behavior across multiple job-relevant simulations and pooling the judgments of several trained assessors. It is a method, not a place: a standardized procedure in which candidates work through exercises such as in-baskets, role-plays, leaderless group discussions, and case analyses while assessors rate defined behavioral dimensions. George Thornton and William Byham's 1982 book consolidated the approach and its evidence, establishing assessment centers as a rigorous, behavior-based alternative to interviews and paper tests for selection and development. The method's logic is to sample behavior directly under realistic conditions and to triangulate across exercises and raters to reach defensible judgments. Arthur, Day, McNelly, and Edens's 2003 meta-analysis quantified the criterion-related validity of the underlying dimensions, sharpening understanding of what assessment centers actually measure. Professional guidelines from the International Task Force on Assessment Center Guidelines govern sound practice.