Proctored Versus Unproctored Internet Tests: Are unproctored noncognitive tests as predictive of job performance?

As the usage of unproctored Internet testing (UIT) increases in selection settings, concerns about the validity of such practices must be addressed. While recent examinations of the issue have focused primarily on the practicality, ethics, and potential legal ramifications of UIT, this paper provide...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of selection and assessment 2011-03, Vol.19 (1), p.1-10
Main Authors: Beaty, James C., Nye, Christopher D., Borneman, Matthew J., Kantrowitz, Tracy M., Drasgow, Fritz, Grauer, Eyal
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
CAI
Computer assisted instruction
Human resource management
Internet
Studies
Testing
Validity
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3609-4c104f613a00c2ad35d8c8aba893446b4537cd2187fcc85e0d4ee8d214ea7aa3
cites
container_end_page 10
container_issue 1
container_start_page 1
container_title International journal of selection and assessment
container_volume 19
creator Beaty, James C.
Nye, Christopher D.
Borneman, Matthew J.
Kantrowitz, Tracy M.
Drasgow, Fritz
Grauer, Eyal
description As the usage of unproctored Internet testing (UIT) increases in selection settings, concerns about the validity of such practices must be addressed. While recent examinations of the issue have focused primarily on the practicality, ethics, and potential legal ramifications of UIT, this paper provides an examination of the criterion‐related validity of unproctored assessments. Using a database of validity evidence, we examine the predictive validity of several noncognitive assessments (i.e., personality and biodata) with respect to a number of subjective and objective job performance metrics. Results generally indicate that assessments administered in proctored and unproctored settings have similar validities. Limitations of this research and implications for practice are discussed.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00529.x
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_wiley</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_851625204</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2266734521</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3609-4c104f613a00c2ad35d8c8aba893446b4537cd2187fcc85e0d4ee8d214ea7aa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkFtPwyAYhonRxDn9D8T7VijQUhNjlsUdzDzFqrsjjFLTurUdtLr9e-lmFrmBvIePLw8AECMfu3NV-JiG3AsIj_0AYewjxILY3xyB3sE4Bj0Uh8xDEZufgjNrC4QQIVHQA-tnU6mmMjqF79rY1sK3sj5I07LRptQNTLRt7DUcGA3bf35Zlar6LPMm_9aw6TJQWlg7K1c7rcpgUS1grU1WmZUslb49ByeZXFp98Xf3QTK6S4YTb_Y0ng4HM0-REMUeVRjRLMREIqQCmRKWcsXlQvKYUBouKCORSgPMo0wpzjRKqdbcCVTLSErSB5f7sW7bdetWE0XVmtL9KDjDYcACRF3oZh_6yZd6K2qTr6TZCoxEx1YUokMoOoSiYyt2bMVGTO9fB-7l-t6-n9tGbw59ab5EGJGIiY_HsRgRnkwe5hPxQn4BZjKBTw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>851625204</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Proctored Versus Unproctored Internet Tests: Are unproctored noncognitive tests as predictive of job performance?</title><source>Business Source Ultimate</source><source>Wiley</source><creator>Beaty, James C. ; Nye, Christopher D. ; Borneman, Matthew J. ; Kantrowitz, Tracy M. ; Drasgow, Fritz ; Grauer, Eyal</creator><creatorcontrib>Beaty, James C. ; Nye, Christopher D. ; Borneman, Matthew J. ; Kantrowitz, Tracy M. ; Drasgow, Fritz ; Grauer, Eyal</creatorcontrib><description>As the usage of unproctored Internet testing (UIT) increases in selection settings, concerns about the validity of such practices must be addressed. While recent examinations of the issue have focused primarily on the practicality, ethics, and potential legal ramifications of UIT, this paper provides an examination of the criterion‐related validity of unproctored assessments. Using a database of validity evidence, we examine the predictive validity of several noncognitive assessments (i.e., personality and biodata) with respect to a number of subjective and objective job performance metrics. Results generally indicate that assessments administered in proctored and unproctored settings have similar validities. Limitations of this research and implications for practice are discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0965-075X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2389</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00529.x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>CAI ; Computer assisted instruction ; Human resource management ; Internet ; Studies ; Testing ; Validity</subject><ispartof>International journal of selection and assessment, 2011-03, Vol.19 (1), p.1-10</ispartof><rights>2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3609-4c104f613a00c2ad35d8c8aba893446b4537cd2187fcc85e0d4ee8d214ea7aa3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Beaty, James C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nye, Christopher D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Borneman, Matthew J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kantrowitz, Tracy M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drasgow, Fritz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grauer, Eyal</creatorcontrib><title>Proctored Versus Unproctored Internet Tests: Are unproctored noncognitive tests as predictive of job performance?</title><title>International journal of selection and assessment</title><description>As the usage of unproctored Internet testing (UIT) increases in selection settings, concerns about the validity of such practices must be addressed. While recent examinations of the issue have focused primarily on the practicality, ethics, and potential legal ramifications of UIT, this paper provides an examination of the criterion‐related validity of unproctored assessments. Using a database of validity evidence, we examine the predictive validity of several noncognitive assessments (i.e., personality and biodata) with respect to a number of subjective and objective job performance metrics. Results generally indicate that assessments administered in proctored and unproctored settings have similar validities. Limitations of this research and implications for practice are discussed.</description><subject>CAI</subject><subject>Computer assisted instruction</subject><subject>Human resource management</subject><subject>Internet</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Testing</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>0965-075X</issn><issn>1468-2389</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpNkFtPwyAYhonRxDn9D8T7VijQUhNjlsUdzDzFqrsjjFLTurUdtLr9e-lmFrmBvIePLw8AECMfu3NV-JiG3AsIj_0AYewjxILY3xyB3sE4Bj0Uh8xDEZufgjNrC4QQIVHQA-tnU6mmMjqF79rY1sK3sj5I07LRptQNTLRt7DUcGA3bf35Zlar6LPMm_9aw6TJQWlg7K1c7rcpgUS1grU1WmZUslb49ByeZXFp98Xf3QTK6S4YTb_Y0ng4HM0-REMUeVRjRLMREIqQCmRKWcsXlQvKYUBouKCORSgPMo0wpzjRKqdbcCVTLSErSB5f7sW7bdetWE0XVmtL9KDjDYcACRF3oZh_6yZd6K2qTr6TZCoxEx1YUokMoOoSiYyt2bMVGTO9fB-7l-t6-n9tGbw59ab5EGJGIiY_HsRgRnkwe5hPxQn4BZjKBTw</recordid><startdate>201103</startdate><enddate>201103</enddate><creator>Beaty, James C.</creator><creator>Nye, Christopher D.</creator><creator>Borneman, Matthew J.</creator><creator>Kantrowitz, Tracy M.</creator><creator>Drasgow, Fritz</creator><creator>Grauer, Eyal</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201103</creationdate><title>Proctored Versus Unproctored Internet Tests: Are unproctored noncognitive tests as predictive of job performance?</title><author>Beaty, James C. ; Nye, Christopher D. ; Borneman, Matthew J. ; Kantrowitz, Tracy M. ; Drasgow, Fritz ; Grauer, Eyal</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3609-4c104f613a00c2ad35d8c8aba893446b4537cd2187fcc85e0d4ee8d214ea7aa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>CAI</topic><topic>Computer assisted instruction</topic><topic>Human resource management</topic><topic>Internet</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Testing</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Beaty, James C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nye, Christopher D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Borneman, Matthew J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kantrowitz, Tracy M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drasgow, Fritz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grauer, Eyal</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><jtitle>International journal of selection and assessment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Beaty, James C.</au><au>Nye, Christopher D.</au><au>Borneman, Matthew J.</au><au>Kantrowitz, Tracy M.</au><au>Drasgow, Fritz</au><au>Grauer, Eyal</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Proctored Versus Unproctored Internet Tests: Are unproctored noncognitive tests as predictive of job performance?</atitle><jtitle>International journal of selection and assessment</jtitle><date>2011-03</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>10</epage><pages>1-10</pages><issn>0965-075X</issn><eissn>1468-2389</eissn><abstract>As the usage of unproctored Internet testing (UIT) increases in selection settings, concerns about the validity of such practices must be addressed. While recent examinations of the issue have focused primarily on the practicality, ethics, and potential legal ramifications of UIT, this paper provides an examination of the criterion‐related validity of unproctored assessments. Using a database of validity evidence, we examine the predictive validity of several noncognitive assessments (i.e., personality and biodata) with respect to a number of subjective and objective job performance metrics. Results generally indicate that assessments administered in proctored and unproctored settings have similar validities. Limitations of this research and implications for practice are discussed.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00529.x</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0965-075X
ispartof International journal of selection and assessment, 2011-03, Vol.19 (1), p.1-10
issn 0965-075X
1468-2389
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_851625204
source Business Source Ultimate; Wiley
subjects CAI
Computer assisted instruction
Human resource management
Internet
Studies
Testing
Validity
title Proctored Versus Unproctored Internet Tests: Are unproctored noncognitive tests as predictive of job performance?
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T18%3A01%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_wiley&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Proctored%20Versus%20Unproctored%20Internet%20Tests:%20Are%20unproctored%20noncognitive%20tests%20as%20predictive%20of%20job%20performance?&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20selection%20and%20assessment&rft.au=Beaty,%20James%20C.&rft.date=2011-03&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=10&rft.pages=1-10&rft.issn=0965-075X&rft.eissn=1468-2389&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00529.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_wiley%3E2266734521%3C/proquest_wiley%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3609-4c104f613a00c2ad35d8c8aba893446b4537cd2187fcc85e0d4ee8d214ea7aa3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=851625204&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true