In Defense of the Situation: An Interactionist Explanation for Performance on Situational Judgment Tests

Whereas Lievens and Motowidlo (2016) propose a model of situational judgment test (SJT) performance that removes the “situation” in favor of conceptualizing SJTs as a measure of general domain knowledge, we argue that the expression of general domain knowledge is in fact contingent on situational ju...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inIndustrial and organizational psychology Vol. 9; no. 1; pp. 23 - 28
Main Authors Harris, Alexandra M., Siedor, Lane E., Fan, Yi, Listyg, Benjamin, Carter, Nathan T.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York, USA Cambridge University Press 01.03.2016
Subjects
Commentaries
Knowledge
Performance evaluation
Personality
Personality traits
Psychological tests
Socialization
Validity
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Whereas Lievens and Motowidlo (2016) propose a model of situational judgment test (SJT) performance that removes the “situation” in favor of conceptualizing SJTs as a measure of general domain knowledge, we argue that the expression of general domain knowledge is in fact contingent on situational judgment. As we explain, the evidence cited by Lievens and Motowidlo against a situational component does not inherently exclude the importance of situations from SJTs and does overlook the strong support for a person–situation interaction explanation of behavior. Based on the interactionist literature—in particular, the trait activation theory (TAT) and situational strength literatures—we propose a model that both maintains the key pathways and definitions posited by Lievens and Motowidlo and integrates the situational component of SJTs.
ISSN:1754-9426
1754-9434
DOI:10.1017/iop.2015.110