Validity of Personal Selection Tests According Professionals

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Pereira, Fabiana Marques
Data de Publicação: 2003
Outros Autores: Primi, Ricardo, Cobêro, Claudia
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Psicologia (Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie. Online)
Texto Completo: http://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/ptp/article/view/1192
Resumo: This study identifies tests and methods used in personnel selection practices in 34 national and multinational companies in the State of São Paulo. It also compares the results with tests used in the United States found in literature by focusing in the predictive validity studies. Results showed that Wartegg (15,2%) and Group Interview (15,2%) were the most frequent tools used. A contradiction was found in the way professionals understand the concept of validity as they refer that the choice is based on the validity of the instrument under consideration although no validity evidence was found in the literature for the mentioned tools. The results point to limitations in professional training that need to be addressed in order to build more competent practices of psychological assessment in the field of industrial and organizational psychology.
id UPM-1_e93efcb049c97984021a85cec61ad3e0
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.editorarevistas.mackenzie.br:article/1192
network_acronym_str UPM-1
network_name_str Psicologia (Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie. Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Validity of Personal Selection Tests According ProfessionalsValidade de Testes Utilizados em Seleção de Pessoal Segundo RecrutadoresPsychological assessmentValidity and Personnel SelectionAvaliação PsicológicaValidade e Seleção de PessoalThis study identifies tests and methods used in personnel selection practices in 34 national and multinational companies in the State of São Paulo. It also compares the results with tests used in the United States found in literature by focusing in the predictive validity studies. Results showed that Wartegg (15,2%) and Group Interview (15,2%) were the most frequent tools used. A contradiction was found in the way professionals understand the concept of validity as they refer that the choice is based on the validity of the instrument under consideration although no validity evidence was found in the literature for the mentioned tools. The results point to limitations in professional training that need to be addressed in order to build more competent practices of psychological assessment in the field of industrial and organizational psychology.Este estudo teve como objetivo listar os testes e métodos utilizados em seleção de pessoal em 34 empresas multinacionais e nacionais do Estado de São Paulo e comparálos com a literatura encontrada sobre os testes utilizados nos Estados Unidos, observandose, principalmente, a existência de estudos de validade preditiva. Os resultados demonstram alta freqüência de utilização do Teste de Wartegg (15,2%) e Dinâmica de Grupo (15,2%). Além disso, há uma contradição em como os recrutadores compreendem validade, já que muitos descrevem utilizar determinados testes pela sua validade, mesmo não existindo estudos empíricos sobre essa característica dos testes citados. Os resultados deste estudo chamam atenção para um problema que precisa ser solucionado, na formação do profissional, para que se possa estabelecer uma prática mais competente no que se refere à avaliação psicológica no contexto organizacional.  Editora Mackenzie2003-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/ptp/article/view/1192Journal Psychology: Theory and Practice ; Vol. 5 No. 2 (2003); 83-98Revista Psicologia: Teoría y Práctica; Vol. 5 Núm. 2 (2003); 83-98Revista Psicologia: Teoria e Prática; v. 5 n. 2 (2003); 83-981980-69061516-3687reponame:Psicologia (Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie. Online)instname:Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie (UPM)instacron:UPMporhttp://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/ptp/article/view/1192/890Pereira, Fabiana MarquesPrimi, RicardoCobêro, Claudiainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-01-04T20:39:54Zoai:ojs.editorarevistas.mackenzie.br:article/1192Revistahttp://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/ptp/indexPRIhttp://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/ptp/oairevistapsico@mackenzie.br1980-69061516-3687opendoar:2023-01-12T16:39:35.902248Psicologia (Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie. Online) - Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie (UPM)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Validity of Personal Selection Tests According Professionals
Validade de Testes Utilizados em Seleção de Pessoal Segundo Recrutadores
title Validity of Personal Selection Tests According Professionals
spellingShingle Validity of Personal Selection Tests According Professionals
Pereira, Fabiana Marques
Psychological assessment
Validity and Personnel Selection
Avaliação Psicológica
Validade e Seleção de Pessoal
title_short Validity of Personal Selection Tests According Professionals
title_full Validity of Personal Selection Tests According Professionals
title_fullStr Validity of Personal Selection Tests According Professionals
title_full_unstemmed Validity of Personal Selection Tests According Professionals
title_sort Validity of Personal Selection Tests According Professionals
author Pereira, Fabiana Marques
author_facet Pereira, Fabiana Marques
Primi, Ricardo
Cobêro, Claudia
author_role author
author2 Primi, Ricardo
Cobêro, Claudia
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Pereira, Fabiana Marques
Primi, Ricardo
Cobêro, Claudia
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Psychological assessment
Validity and Personnel Selection
Avaliação Psicológica
Validade e Seleção de Pessoal
topic Psychological assessment
Validity and Personnel Selection
Avaliação Psicológica
Validade e Seleção de Pessoal
description This study identifies tests and methods used in personnel selection practices in 34 national and multinational companies in the State of São Paulo. It also compares the results with tests used in the United States found in literature by focusing in the predictive validity studies. Results showed that Wartegg (15,2%) and Group Interview (15,2%) were the most frequent tools used. A contradiction was found in the way professionals understand the concept of validity as they refer that the choice is based on the validity of the instrument under consideration although no validity evidence was found in the literature for the mentioned tools. The results point to limitations in professional training that need to be addressed in order to build more competent practices of psychological assessment in the field of industrial and organizational psychology.
publishDate 2003
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2003-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/ptp/article/view/1192
url http://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/ptp/article/view/1192
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv http://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/ptp/article/view/1192/890
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Editora Mackenzie
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Editora Mackenzie
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Journal Psychology: Theory and Practice ; Vol. 5 No. 2 (2003); 83-98
Revista Psicologia: Teoría y Práctica; Vol. 5 Núm. 2 (2003); 83-98
Revista Psicologia: Teoria e Prática; v. 5 n. 2 (2003); 83-98
1980-6906
1516-3687
reponame:Psicologia (Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie. Online)
instname:Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie (UPM)
instacron:UPM
instname_str Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie (UPM)
instacron_str UPM
institution UPM
reponame_str Psicologia (Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie. Online)
collection Psicologia (Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie. Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Psicologia (Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie. Online) - Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie (UPM)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revistapsico@mackenzie.br
_version_ 1797051380054097920

Registros relacionados