Scholarlink

<p>A frequently touted situational judgment test (SJT) "known fact" is the would-do/should-do effect. Specifically, it is widely accepted as common knowledge that a <i>should-do</i> response instruction results in an SJT that has a more cognitive/knowledge-based orientation. In contrast, a <i>would-do</i> instruction results in a more personality/behavioral tendency orientation. Despite its widespread acceptance, a detailed review of the literature failed to locate any <i>direct</i> tests of this effect using a single-word manipulation of the response instruction focal word (i.e., would versus should) with a manipulation check. Furthermore, from a cognition and information processing perspective, for the response instructions to engender the posited effect, test takers must first perceive and process the instructions (would versus should). Consequently, the present study re-examined the SJT would-do/should-do response instruction effect by using an experimental design to (1) examine whether and the extent to which test takers accurately recalled the focal word of the response instructions, (2) assess the effectiveness of two interventions to increase recall accuracy, and (3) attempt to replicate the response instruction effect by examining correlations of SJT scores with personality (i.e., agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability) and general mental ability. The results from a between-subjects factorial design using a sample of 328 participants indicated that in the absence of priming and saliency interventions, participants generally failed to accurately recall the focal word in the response instructions. Additionally, we failed to obtain support for the construct-related validity effects of the response instructions. The scholarly and applied implications of these results are discussed.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Is "Should" Really Different From "Would"? An Experimental Examination of the Processing of the Focal Word in Situational Judgment Test Response Instructions

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月13日

查看全文
  • Winfred Arthur Jr.,
  • Benjamin D. Schulte,
  • Juan C. Batarse,
  • Zachary Traylor

摘要

A frequently touted situational judgment test (SJT) "known fact" is the would-do/should-do effect. Specifically, it is widely accepted as common knowledge that a should-do response instruction results in an SJT that has a more cognitive/knowledge-based orientation. In contrast, a would-do instruction results in a more personality/behavioral tendency orientation. Despite its widespread acceptance, a detailed review of the literature failed to locate any direct tests of this effect using a single-word manipulation of the response instruction focal word (i.e., would versus should) with a manipulation check. Furthermore, from a cognition and information processing perspective, for the response instructions to engender the posited effect, test takers must first perceive and process the instructions (would versus should). Consequently, the present study re-examined the SJT would-do/should-do response instruction effect by using an experimental design to (1) examine whether and the extent to which test takers accurately recalled the focal word of the response instructions, (2) assess the effectiveness of two interventions to increase recall accuracy, and (3) attempt to replicate the response instruction effect by examining correlations of SJT scores with personality (i.e., agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability) and general mental ability. The results from a between-subjects factorial design using a sample of 328 participants indicated that in the absence of priming and saliency interventions, participants generally failed to accurately recall the focal word in the response instructions. Additionally, we failed to obtain support for the construct-related validity effects of the response instructions. The scholarly and applied implications of these results are discussed.