Differentiating specific job knowledge from implicit trait policies in procedural knowledge measured by a situational judgment test.

This study compared validities of situational judgment test (SJT) scoring keys that were presumed to be differentially saturated with specific knowledge about effective job behavior and general knowledge about effective trait expression. The keys were based on subject matter experts' effectiveness judgments, undergraduates' effectiveness judgments, and graduate students' trait judgments. We used data reported earlier by Motowidlo, Dunnette, and Carter (1990) with managerial incumbents in telecommunication companies.

Implicit policies about relations between personality traits and behavioral effectiveness in situational judgment items.

This paper develops the concept of implicit trait policy (ITP), which is a variant of the accentuation effect described by Tajfel (1957). ITPs are implicit beliefs about causal relations between personality traits and behavioral effectiveness. Studies reported here tested the hypotheses (a) that personality traits affect ITPs so that agreeable people, for instance, believe the relation between agreeableness and effectiveness is more strongly positive than disagreeable people do and (b) that ITPs can predict behavior that expresses associated personality traits.

Liking and attributions of motives as mediators of the relationships between individuals' reputations, helpful behaviors, and raters' reward decisions.

Two studies investigated the mediating effects of liking and attributions of motives on the relationship between a ratee's reputation and helpful behaviors and raters' reward decisions. During managerial simulations, raters evaluated individuals after watching videotapes in which the individual's reputation and helpful behaviors were manipulated. Results indicated an interaction effect between reputation and helpful behaviors such that a helpful person with a good reputation received more rewards than did a helpful person with a bad reputation.

Effects of procedure and outcome accountability on interview validity.

This study tested effects of holding interviewers accountable for either the procedure they follow to make interview judgments (procedure accountability) or the accuracy of their judgments (outcome accountability) on interview validity. Undergraduates (N = 338) simulated employment interviewers in an experiment that crossed 2 levels of procedure accountability with 2 levels of outcome accountability. They watched videotapes of 60 managers answering an interview question and rated the managers on leadership potential.