Thesis (MA) -- University of Stellenbosch, 2001. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to determine the applicability of a nomological model for the assessment of psychological measurement validity with reference to personnel selection. The model, which can be traced to Thorndike (1949), Campbell and Fiske (1959), Nunnally (1967, cited in Duvenage, 1990), Guion (1974, cited in Duvenage, 1990), Binning and Barrett (1989) and Duvenage (1990), provides the evidential bases for two empirically founded validation strategies, namely criterion- and constructrelated validity. Theoretically, the Nomological Model for Psychological Measurement Validity Assessment proved to be applicable for validating that a measure is able to predict job performance. An easily understandable empirical investigation was required to verify the scientific utility of the model for selection validation. The model was used to validate the procedure for selecting machine operators in a large food manufacturer. The investigation illustrated that by utilising Route 1 of the nomological model, evidence of criterion-related validity, as described by legal and professional standards, is generated. Furthermore, the study indicated that by utilising Route 2 of the model, evidential requirements of construct-related validity as set by legal and professional standards are met. The results of the study proved that the Nomological Model for Psychological Measurement Validity Assessment is theoretically, professionally, legally and practically applicable for the validation of personnel selection procedures. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van hierdie studie was om die toepasbaarheid van 'n nomologiese model vir die bepaling van die geldigheid van sielkundige meting ten opsigte van personeelkeuring vas te stel. Die model, wat sy oorsprong in die werk van Thorndike (1949), Campbell en Fiske (1959), Nunnally (1967, aangehaal uit Duvenage, 1990), Guion (1974, aangehaal uit Duvenage, 1990), Binning en Barrett (1989) en Duvenage (1990) het, verskaf getuienis basisse vir twee ernpirles gefundeerde valideringsstrategiee, naamlik kriterlum- en konstruk-verwante geldigheid. Daar is teoretiese bewyse gevind vir die toepasbaarheid van die Nomologiese Model vir Sielkundige Meting Geldigheids Raming vir die validering van metingsvoorspelbaarheid van werksprestasie. 'n Maklik verstaanbare empmese ondersoek was nodig om die model se wetenskaplike nut vir keuringsgeldigheid te bepaal. Die model was gebruik vir die validering van keuringsprosedure-geldigheid van masjienoperateurs in 'n groot voedselverwerkingsmaatskappy. Die ondersoek het ge"illustreer dat deur die toepassing van Roete 1 van die nomologiese model, bewyse gegenereer is vir kriterium-verwante geldigheid, 5005 voorgeskryf deur relevante wetgewing en professionele standaarde. Verder, deur die toepassing van Roete 2 van hierdie model, word voldoende bewyse vir konstruk-verwante geldigheid, 5005 voorgeskryf deur wetlike en professionele standaarde, verkry. Die resultate van die studie bewys dat die Nomologiese Model vir Sielkundige Meting Geldigheids Raming teoreties, professioneel, wettig en prakties toepasbaar is vir die validering van personeel keu ri ngsprosed ures.

This research attempts to confirm the reliability and construct validity of a personnel selection instrument called a Situational Judgment Test (SJT) through reliability analysis and factor analysis. The existing literature on SJTs is reviewed, including the advantages of using SJTs in personnel selection as well as the debate on whether SJTs measure a single construct or whether they can be multidimensional depending on the content. The specific SJT in this research was theoretically developed and received expert ratings to assess four general constructs: problem solving, planning, priority setting, and leadership. No support from alpha internal consistency reliability analysis was found for the assembly of these items into the four a priori subscales, thus assembly of these items into the theoretical subscales and scales was not supported.

Thesis (MComm (Industrial Psychology))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The last two decades have witnessed an upsurge in the research and use of psychometric tests to aid in the prediction of managerial performance. Currently the most prevailing predictor constructs of managerial performance are cognitive ability, personality, and experience. However, researchers and practitioners are still looking for ways in which to maximise the prediction of managerial performance. In recent years, Situational Judgement Tests (SJTs) have become an increasingly popular selection tool. SJTs are multidimensional psychometric instruments designed to assess an individual’s judgement concerning work-related situations. Evidence to date indicates that SJTs are valid predictors of performance, especially for managerial positions in which interpersonal interactions are important. The main objective of this study was to examine whether SJTs significantly add to the prediction of managerial performance over other measures used for managerial selection, such as measures of cognitive ability and personality. Measures of specific cognitive abilities, personality and a SJT were administered to branch managers in a South African retail bank (N = 124) to investigate the ability of the measures to predict managerial performance. Managerial performance was measured using three measures; Performance Ranking, a Behavioural Observation Scale (BOS) and an Overall Performance Rating. Hierarchical multiple regression was used to investigate the relationship between the predictor composites and the managerial performance measures. Findings reveal different prediction patterns for the three criteria. A multiple correlation coefficient of .442 (p > .05) was obtained when predicting Performance Ranking measures, .308 (p < .05) was obtained for predicting the Behavioural Observation Scale (BOS) measure, and .318 (p > .05) was obtained when predicting the Overall Performance Rating measure. Therefore, only when predicting the BOS measure, the SJT provided incremental validity over cognitive ability and personality measures. Consequently, the average of the scores of the three criterion measures, i.e., the Managerial Performance Composite, was used to evaluate the a priori hypotheses. A multiple correlation of .366 (p > .05) was obtained for predicting the Managerial Performance Composite criterion. Results therefore indicate that the SJT did not exhibit meaningful or statistically significant incremental prediction over cognitive ability and personality to predict the composite managerial performance measure. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die laaste twee dekades het ‘n toename in die gebruik van psigometriese toetse in die voorspelling van bestuurdersprestasie waargeneem. Tans is kognitiewe vermoë, persoonlikheid en ervaring die mees algemene voorspellingskonstrukte vir bestuurdersprestasie. Navorsers en praktisyns is egter op soek na maniere om die voorspelling van bestuurdersprestasie te verbeter. ‘n Onlangse verwikkeling is dat “Situational Judgement Tests” (SJTs) toeneem in gewildheid as seleksie-metode. SJTs is multi-dimensionele psigometriese toetse wat ontwerp is om ‘n individu se oordeelsvermoë ten opsigte van werksverwante situasies te assesseer. Navorsing tot op hede wys dat SJTs geldige voorspellers van prestasie is, veral vir bestuursposisies waarin interpersoonlike interaksies belangrik is. Die hoofdoel van hierdie studie was om te ondersoek of SJTs betekenisvolle waarde toevoeg tot die voorspelling van bestuurdersprestasie bo die gebruik van ander meetinstrumente wat vir bestuurskeuring gebruik word, soos metings van kognitiewe vermoë en persoonlikheid. Vir hierdie doel, is takbestuurders in ‘n Suid Afrikaanse bank (N = 124) se kognitiewe vermoëns, persoonlikheid en situasionele beoordelingsvermoë getoets om die vermoë van die meetinstrumente om bestuurdersprestasie te voorspel, te ondersoek. Bestuurdersprestasie was deur middel van drie meetinstrumente bepaal; prestasie-rangordening (“Performance Ranking”), ‘n gedragsobservasieskaal (“Behavioural Observation Scale”) en ‘n algehele prestasiebeoordelingsmeting (“Overall Performance Rating”). Hiërargiese meervoudige regressie-ontleding was gebruik om die verhouding tussen die voorspellers en die bestuurdersprestasiemetings te ondersoek. Verskillende voorspellingspatrone is vir die drie meetinstrumente gevind. ‘n Meervoudige korrelasie koeffisiënt van .308 (p < .05) is vir die voorspelling van die BOS meting verkry, terwyl .442 (p > .05) en .308 (p < .05) onderskeidelik vir die voorspelling van die prestasie-rangordening en algehele prestasiebeoordelingsmeting verkry is. Gevolglik het slegs die BOS meting inkrementele geldigheid getoon. Die gemiddeld van hierdie drie metings se tellings is gebruik om ‘n bestuurdersprestasie-kombinasietelling “Managerial Performance Composite” te skep wat gebruik is om die finale besluit rakende die a priori hipoteses te maak. ‘n Meervoudige korrelasie van .366 (p >.05) was gevind ten einde die bestuurdersprestasie-kombinasietelling te voorspel aan die hand van die voorspellers.