期刊文献+

结构化面试中面试官的评分及影响因素 被引量:23

Interviewer's Rating and Influencing Factors in Structural Interview
下载PDF
导出
摘要 结构化面试是人事选拔中采用的主要评价方法之一。解释结构化面试过程中面试官和应聘者行为反应的理论观点有社会互动理论、拟剧论、行为一致性观点、特质激活理论等。一个完整的结构化面试可以划分为关系建立、题目问答和分数评定三个阶段。在结构化面试中,面试官的行为从观察、获取、分析、回应应聘者的各种表现信息,形成初始印象,到参照面试评分标准评分等,经历了一系列相互影响的心理过程。影响面试官评分的主要因素包括面试设计因素和考官自身等内部因素,以及应聘者因素、面试环境因素等外部因素两个方面。结合应聘者反应,探索面试官评分的心理机制是今后结构化面试研究的突破点。 Structural Interview has become one of the most widely used methods in personnel selection. Several theories, such as Social Interaction Theory, Dramaturgy Theory, Behavioral Consistency Paradigm, and Trait Activation Theory, have been trying to explain the behaviors and response of interviewers and applicants in structural interviews. An integral structural interview can be divided into three phases: rapport-building, questioning / responding, and rating of applicants by interviewers. During the interview, interviewers would experience a series of mental activities, including observing, acquiring, analyzing and responding to applicants' performance, forming the initial impression, then completing rating by referring to rating standard. The major factors that may influence an interviewer's judgment involve two types of factors, the first type is internal ones, including designing factors and interviewer factors; the second type is external ones, including applicants' factors and environmental factors. The future breakthrough in this field of research should include the exploration of psychological mechanism of interviewer's rating combined with the applicants' reactions in the interviews.
出处 《心理科学进展》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2014年第2期357-368,共12页 Advances in Psychological Science
基金 北京市大学生科学研究与创业行动计划2012年度项目 国家基础科学人才培养基金(J1103601&J1210048)资助
关键词 结构化面试 评分 面试官 structural interview rating interviewer personnel selection
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献106

  • 1王利,李永鑫.招聘中的虚假反应及其识别[J].人力资源管理,2008(5):49-50. 被引量:1
  • 2Schmidt, E L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity of selection methods in personnel psychology: practical and theoretical implications of 85 years or research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274.
  • 3Schrnidt, F. L., & Rader, M. (1999). Exploring the boundary conditions for interview validity: meta-analytic validity findings for a new interview type. Personnel Psychology, 52, 445-464.
  • 4Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S. (2002). Comprehensive meta-analysis of the construct validity of the employment interview. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11, 299-324.
  • 5Sackett, P. R., & Lievens, F. (2008). Personnel Selection. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 419-450.
  • 6Taylor, P. J., & Small, B. (2002). Asking applicants what they would do versus what they did do: a meta-analytic comparison of situational and past behavior employment interview questions. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 277-294.
  • 7Ulrich, L., & Trumbo, D. (1965). The selection interview since 1949. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 100-116.
  • 8Van Iddekinge, C. H., Raymark, E H., Edison, C. E., & Attenweiler, W. J. (2004). What do structured selection interviews really measure? The construct validity of behavior description interviews. Human Performance, 17, 71-93.
  • 9Van Iddekinge, C. H., Raymark, P. H., & Roth, P. L. (2005). Assessing personality with a structured employment interview: construct-related validity and susceptibility to response inflation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 536-552.
  • 10Wright, P. M., Lichtenfels, P. A., & Pursell, E. D. (1989). The structured interview: additional studies and a meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 62, 191-199.

共引文献19

同被引文献229

引证文献23

二级引证文献38

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部