an article by Adrian Furnham (University College London) and Chris J Jackson (University of New South Wales) published in Journal of Managerial Psychology Volume 26 Issue 7 (2011)
Abstract
Purpose
This study seeks to investigate human resource practitioners’ attitudes and beliefs about work-related psychological tests. The purpose was to look at the structure and correlates of those beliefs.
Design/methodology/approach
In all, 255 practitioners from human resource and related disciplines completed a 64-item questionnaire on their attitudes to, and beliefs about, work-related psychological tests.
Findings
Overall, the participants were positive about the validity and hence usefulness of tests. Factor analysis suggested that attitudes to tests fell into four easily identifiable factors (Test complexity, Practical application, Bias, and Usefulness of psychological tests). It was found that all four factors were predicted by age or educational qualifications or both.
Research limitations/implications
The study had a restricted sample of test users. It would be interesting to test a bigger and more representative sample of those in HR, training and coaching and get more specific details on which tests they used, why those particular tests and how they used the data they provide.
Originality/value
The aim of this study is to investigate whether practitioners generally find psychological tests in general useful, what aspects of psychological tests are most valued and what aspects are least liked. It also set out to determine whether the perceived scepticism toward, or enthusiasm for, psychological tests could be predicted by test user experience, and test user academic qualifications. Whist some survey studies have been interested in expert opinion, this study looked at practitioners from HR and related disciplines.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment