Cited by 470Psychological Testing and AssessmentCognitive Abilities and TestingMedical Education and Admissions

Use of situational judgment tests to predict job performance: A clarification of the literature.

McDaniel, Michael A., Morgeson, Frederick P., Finnegan, Elizabeth Bruhn, Campion, Michael A., Braverman, Eric P.·2001·Journal of Applied Psychology

Abstract

Although situational judgment tests have a long history in the psychological assessment literature and continue to be frequently used in employment contexts, there has been virtually no summarization of this literature. The purpose of this article is to review the history of such tests and present the results of a meta-analysis on criterion-related and construct validity. On the basis of 102 coefficients and 10,640 people, situational judgment tests showed useful levels of validity (rho = .34) that were generalizable. A review of 79 correlations between situational judgment tests and general cognitive ability involving 16,984 people indicated that situational judgment tests typically evidence relationships with cognitive ability (rho = .46). On the basis of the literature review and meta-analytic findings, implications for the continued use of situational judgment tests are discussed, particularly in terms of recent investigations into tacit knowledge.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0021-9010.86.4.730

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A meta-analysis generated an adjusted correlation of .34 between SJTs and job performance, supporting criterion-related validity of SJTs.

    “McDaniel, Morgeson, Finnegan, Campion, and Braverman's (2001) meta-analysis generated an adjusted correlation of .34 between SJTs and job performance, supporting criterion-related validity of SJTs.”

    From Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions (2016) · cites this paper as McDaniel, Morgeson, Finnegan, Campion, and Braverman's (2001)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McDaniel, M. A., Morgeson, F. P., Finnegan, E. B., Campion, M. A., & Braverman, E. P.
Affiliations
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
  • Ameren (United States) (US)
  • AT&T (United States) (US)
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Published
2001
Volume
86
Issue
4
Pages
730-740
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
OpenAlex
W2148353238
Cited by
470
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 28
FWCI
16.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical Education and Admissions
Keywords
situational judgment tests, job performance prediction, criterion validity, construct validity, general intelligence, tacit knowledge, employment testing
MeSH terms
Employee Performance Appraisal, Forecasting, Humans, Predictive Value of Tests, Problem Solving, Professional Competence, Psychology, Industrial, Psychometrics, Task Performance and Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review