Discussion 2: Interviewing vs. Testing

Fair and accurate decision making has long been a goal of psychological testing. The earliest known uses of psychological tests were civil service exams, established in China 2,000 years ago. These tests helped to assess individual ability, establishing an arguably fairer way to select capable employees and de-emphasize rank and personal connections.

Nevertheless, decisions about people are not always made using psychological tests. They can be made with clinical judgment, generally involving interviews; or they can be made actuarially, often involving tests and the application of a prediction formula. Examine the following scenario and consider whether, for this situation, interviewing or psychological testing might be a more effective evaluative method.

The warden at a prison where you work wishes to hire several new prison guards. The warden asks you to select a method for evaluating the abilities and personality traits of the potential candidates. Which would you recommend as a method for making the hiring decisions—an interview or a psychological test?

With these thoughts in mind:

Post by Day 4 a brief explanation of differences between objective (testing) and subjective (interviewing) methods. Then state your position, based on the scenario provided, on whether an objective (testing) or subjective (interviewing) method is a more effective evaluative approach. Support your response using the Learning Resources and the current literature.

Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources.

Read a selection of your colleagues' postings.