IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v17y2024i2p192-205_4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Any slice is predictive? On the consistency of impressions from the beginning, middle, and end of assessment center exercises and their relation to performance

Author

Listed:
  • Ingold, Pia V.
  • Heimann, Anna Luca
  • Breil, Simon M.

Abstract

This study generates new insights on the role of initial impressions in assessment centers. Drawing from the “thin slices” of behavior paradigm in personality and social psychology, we investigate to what extent initial impressions of assessees—based on different slices of assessment center exercises (i.e., two minutes at the beginning, middle, and end of AC exercises)—are consistent across and within AC exercises, and are relevant for predicting assessment center performance and job performance. Employed individuals (N = 223) participated in three interactive assessment center exercises, while being observed and evaluated by trained assessors. Based upon video-recordings of all assessment center exercises, a different, untrained group of raters subsequently provided ratings of their general initial impressions of assessees for the beginning, middle, and end of each exercise. As criterion measure, supervisors rated assessees’ job performance. Results show that initial impressions in assessment centers are (a) relatively stable, (b) consistently predict assessment center performance across different slices of behavior (i.e., across the three time points and exercises), and (c) mostly relate to job performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Ingold, Pia V. & Heimann, Anna Luca & Breil, Simon M., 2024. "Any slice is predictive? On the consistency of impressions from the beginning, middle, and end of assessment center exercises and their relation to performance," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 192-205, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:17:y:2024:i:2:p:192-205_4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1754942624000026/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:17:y:2024:i:2:p:192-205_4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.