Every enterprise or company is interested in employing the workers able to bring as much progress in its performance as possible. To reach this aim, organizations resort to the use of various psychological tests. The essence of all the tests discussed further lies in the need of the employers to find out if a certain applicant fits a certain position in this organization. Thus, the present paper will focus on the major types of psychological tests, their similarities and differences, effects and such a prominent notion as their validity.
To begin with, it is necessary to find out the major requirements that organizations and applicants have for the job placement psychological tests. The first and, probably, the most important one is the demand for the validity of the tests. This criterion is stressed as paramount due to the overall striving of the society towards the equality of rights of every kind of minority. Also, the scholars report the direct connection between the test’s validity and future job productivity of the workers selected by those valid tests. Moreover, “validity has acquired new urgency because of the widespread concern about the job placement of culturally and educationally disadvantaged minorities. An invalid test or one that includes elements not related to the job under consideration may unfairly exclude minority group members who could perform the job satisfactorily” (Anastasi and Urbina, p. 492).
Furthermore, the psychological tests used for personnel selection should focus exclusively on the traits and skills of an applicant that are directly or indirectly connected with the probable job: “Effective placement also implies that traits irrelevant to the requirements of the particular job should not affect selection decisions, either favorably or unfavorably” (Anastasi and Urbina, p. 491). To conform to these requirements, such types of psychological tests have been invented as probationary appointment, job samples, simulations, and assessment center techniques implying all the above-mentioned ones, i. e. simulations and job samples, but also making use of role-playing, group decision making, business games, etc. The probationary appointment lacks credibility as an applicant is affected by the atmosphere of the test, while job samples and simulations can create the feeling of real working situations to see how an applicant can handle them. The peculiarity of the assessment center techniques includes the presence of multiple assessors and peer reviewers ensuring the objectiveness and reliability of test results (Anastasi and Urbina, p. 492 – 493).
Needless to say, the organizations use specific procedures and practices to develop such tests. One of them is the comprehensive job analysis involving the use of numerous sources of information on a company and educational materials. This method, as well as the job elements method, allows understanding the basic elements of a job and determining the skills that applicants should display to de employed. Moreover, the most progressive organizations apply Fleishman Job Analysis Survey (F-JAS) and Word Keys system to identify knowledge skills and abilities required for their specific positions. Synthetic validation and validity generalization methods are also used in this field for forecasting future job performance, the former – with the help of the comprehensive job analysis, test analysis, and their comparing, while the latter – by generalizations made for every kind of job (Anastasi & Urbina, p. 494 – 495).
So, to conclude, it is obvious that psychological testing is a necessary tool allowing organizations to select the most qualified and fitting employees for certain positions. The tests should be validated and objective to ensure both the equal rights of all applicants and the largest possible use for organizations.
Works Cited
Anastasi, Anne and Susana Urbina. Psychological Testing. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1997.