Advertisement

Advances in Health Sciences Education

, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 859–881 | Cite as

Recruiting for values in healthcare: a preliminary review of the evidence

  • Fiona PattersonEmail author
  • Linda Prescott-Clements
  • Lara Zibarras
  • Helena Edwards
  • Maire Kerrin
  • Fran Cousans
Review

Abstract

Displaying compassion, benevolence and respect, and preserving the dignity of patients are important for any healthcare professional to ensure the provision of high quality care and patient outcomes. This paper presents a structured search and thematic review of the research evidence relating to values-based recruitment within healthcare. Several different databases, journals and government reports were searched to retrieve studies relating to values-based recruitment published between 1998 and 2013, both in healthcare settings and other occupational contexts. There is limited published research related to values-based recruitment directly, so the available theoretical context of values is explored alongside an analysis of the impact of value congruence. The implications for the design of selection methods to measure values is explored beyond the scope of the initial literature search. Research suggests some selection methods may be appropriate for values-based recruitment, such as situational judgment tests (SJTs), structured interviews and multiple-mini interviews (MMIs). Personality tests were also identified as having the potential to compliment other methods (e.g. structured interviews), as part of a values-based recruitment agenda. Methods including personal statements, references and unstructured/‘traditional’ interviews were identified as inappropriate for values-based recruitment. Practical implications are discussed in the context of values-based recruitment in the healthcare context. Theoretical implications of our findings imply that prosocial implicit trait policies, which could be measured by selection tools such as SJTs and MMIs, may be linked to individuals’ values via the behaviours individuals consider to be effective in given situations. Further research is required to state this conclusively however, and methods for values-based recruitment represent an exciting and relatively unchartered territory for further research.

Keywords

Values based recruitment Selection Healthcare Review 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge Health Education England (HEE) for funding an initial literature review on Values-based recruitment. We also acknowledge Vicki Ashworth for her support in the initial scoping of the literature searches.

Conflict of interest

FP, FC and HE from Work Psychology Group provide advice to Health Education England on selection methodology. However Work Psychology Group does not receive royalties for any methodology used.

References

Structured literature search

  1. *Amos, E. A., & Weathington, B. L. (2008). An analysis of the relation between employee–organization value congruence and employee attitudes. The Journal of Psychology, 142(6), 615–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. *Arnold, J., Coombs, C., Wilkinson, A., Loan-Clarke, J., Park, J., & Preston, D. (2003). Corporate images of the United Kingdom National Health Service: Implications for the recruitment and retention of nursing and allied health profession staff. Corporate Reputation Review, 6(3), 223–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. *Bauer, T. N., Maertz, C. P., Dolen, M. R., & Campion, M. A. (1998). Longitudinal assessment of applicant reactions to employment testing and test outcome feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 892–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. *Billsberry, J. (2007). Attracting for values: An empirical study of ASA’s attraction proposition. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(2), 132–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. *Cable, D. M., & Parsons, C. K. (2001). Socialization tactics and person–organization fit. Personnel Psychology, 54(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. *Chao, G. T., O’Leary-Kelly, A. M., Wolf, S., Klein, H. J., & Gardner, P. D. (1994). Organizational socialization: Its content and consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 730–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. *De Cooman, R., Gieter, S. De., Pepermans, R., Hermans, S., Bois, C. Du., Caers, R., & Jegers, M. (2009). Person–organization fit: Testing socialization and attraction–selection–attrition hypotheses. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(1), 102–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. *Finegan, J. E. (2000). The impact of person and organizational values on organizational commitment. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(2), 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. *Hoffman, B., & Woehr, D. (2005). A quantitative review of the relationship between person–organisation fit and behavioural outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 68, 389–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. *Hollup, O. (2012). Nurses in Mauritius motivated by extrinsic rewards: A qualitative study of factors determining recruitment and career choices. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 49(10), 1291–1298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. *Kristof-Brown, A. (2000). Perceived applicant fit: Distinguishing between recruiters’ perceptions of person–job and person–organization fit. Personnel Psychology, 53(3), 643–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. *Kristof-Brown, A. L., Jansen, K. J., & Colbert, A. E. (2002). A policy-capturing study of the simultaneous effects of fit with jobs, groups, and organizations. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 985–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. *Maierhofer, N. I., Griffin, M. A., & Sheehan, M. (2000). Linking manager values and behavior with employee values and behavior: A study of values and safety in the hairdressing industry. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(4), 417–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. *Meglino, B. M., & Ravlin, E. C. (1998). Individual values in organizations: Concepts, controversies, and research. Journal of Management, 24(3), 351–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. *Morse, B. J., & Popovich, P. M. (2009). Realistic recruitment practices in organizations: The potential benefits of generalized expectancy calibration. Human Resource Management Review, 19(1), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. *Ostroff, C., Shin, Y., & Kinicki, A. J. (2005). Multiple perspectives of congruence: Relationships between value congruence and employee attitudes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(6), 591–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. *Rankin, B. (2013). Emotional intelligence: Enhancing values-based practice and compassionate care in nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69(12), 2717–2725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. *Rapping, J. A. (2009). You can’t build on shaky ground: Laying the foundation for indigent defense reform through values-based recruitment, training, and mentoring. Harvard Law & Policy Review (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  19. *Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2002). Is job search related to employment quality? It all depends on the fit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 646–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. *Van Vianen, A. E. M. (2000). Person–organization fit: The match between newcomers’ and recruiters’ preferences for organizational cultures. Personnel Psychology, 53(1), 113–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thematic review

  1. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (2012). Nature and use of personality in selection. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of personnel assessment and selection (pp. 225–251). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9(1–2), 9–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berry, C., Sackett, P., & Landers, R. (2007). Revising interview–cognitive ability relationships: Attending to specific range restriction mechanisms in meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 60(4), 837–874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Birkeland, S. A., Manson, T. M., Kisamore, J. L., Brannick, M. T., & Smith, M. A. (2006). A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Job Applicant Faking on Personality Measures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14(4), 317–335. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00354.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bollaert, H., & Petit, V. (2010). Beyond the dark side of executive psychology: Current research and new directions. European Management Journal, 28, 362–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bore, M. R. (2001). The psychology of morality: A libertarian–communitarian dimension and a dissonance model of moral decision making, PhD dissertation, University of Newcastle, Australia.Google Scholar
  7. Bore, M., Munro, D., Kerridge, I., & Powis, D. (2005a). Selection of medical students according to their moral orientation. Medical Education, 39(3), 266–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bore, M. R., Munro, D., Kerridge, I., & Powis, D. A. (2005b). Not moral “reasoning”: A libertarian–communitarian dimension of moral orientation and Schwartz’s value types. Australian Journal of Psychology, 57(1), 49–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Byrnes, D. A., Kiger, G., & Shechtman, Z. (2003). Evaluating the use of group interviews to select students into teacher-education programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(2), 163–172.Google Scholar
  10. Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1997). Interviewers’perceptions of person–organization fit and organizational selection decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(4), 546–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cavendish, C. (2013). The Cavendish review: An independent review into healthcare assistants and support workers in the NHS and social care settings. London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
  12. Cleland, J., Dowell, J., McLachlan, J., Nicholson, S., & Patterson, F. (2012). Identifying best practice in the selection of medical students. London: General Medical Council. gmc-uk.org/about/research/14400.asp
  13. Clevenger, J., Pereira, G. M., Wiechmann, D., Schmitt, N., & Harvey, V. S. (2001). Incremental validity of situational judgment tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 410–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Conway, J. M., Jako, R. A., & Goodman, D. F. (1995). A meta-analysis of interrater and internal consistency reliability of selection interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(5), 565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Donnon, T., Oddone-Paolucci, E., & Violato, C. (2009). A predictive validity study of medical judgment vignettes to assess students’ noncognitive attributes: A 3-year prospective longitudinal study. Medical Teacher, 31(4), 148–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dore, K. L., Kreuger, S., Ladhani, M., Rolfson, D., Kurtz, D., Kulasegaram, K., et al. (2010). The reliability and acceptability of the multiple mini-interview as a selection instrument for postgraduate admissions. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 85(10), 60–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dore, K. L., Reiter, H. I., Eva, K. W., Krueger, S., Scriven, E., Siu, E., et al. (2009). Extending the interview to all medical school candidates—computer-based multiple sample evaluation of noncognitive skills (CMSENS). Academic Medicine, 84(10), S9–S12.Google Scholar
  18. Dowell, J., Lumsden, M. A., Powis, D., Munro, D., Bore, M., Makubate, B., & Kumwenda, B. (2011). Predictive validity of the personal qualities assessment for selection of medical students in Scotland. Medical Teacher, 33(9), 485–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Edwards, J., Johnson, E., & Molidor, J. (1990). The interview in the admission process. Academic Medicine, 65(3), 167–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eva, K., Reiter, H., Rosenfeld, J., & Norman, G. (2004). The relationship between interviewers’ characteristics and ratings assigned during a multiple mini-interview. Academic Medicine, 79, 602–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Eva, K., Reiter, H., & Trinh, K. (2009). Predictive validity of the multiple mini-interview for selecting medical trainees. Medical Education, 43, 767–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eva, K., & Rosenfeld, J. (2004). An admissions OSCE: The multiple mini-interview. Medical Education, 38, 314–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ferguson, E., James, D., & Madeley, L. (2002). Factors associated with success in medical school: Systematic review of the literature. British Medical Journal, 324(7343), 952–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ferguson, E., James, D., O’Hehir, F., Sanders, A., & McManus, I. C. (2003). Pilot study of the roles of personality, references, and personal statements in relation to performance over the five years of a medical degree. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 326(7386), 429–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ferguson, E., Sanders, A., O’Hehir, F., & James, D. (2000). Predictive validity of personal statements and the role of the five-factor model of personality in relation to medical training. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(3), 321–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ferguson, E., Semper, H., Yates, J., Fitzgerald, J. E., Skatova, A., & James, D. (2014). The ‘dark side’ and ‘bright side’ of personality: When too much conscientiousness and too little anxiety are detrimental with respect to the acquisition of medical knowledge and skill. PLoS One, 9(2), e88606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Francis QC, R. (2013). Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry. Retrieved from http://www.midstaffspublicinquiry.com/sites/default/files/report/Executivesummary.pdf
  28. Gibbons, J., Bore, M., Munro, D., & Powis, D. (2007). Using personal quality assessment for selection of social work students. Australian Social Work, 60(2), 210–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Harms, P. D., Spain, S. M., & Hannah, S. T. (2011). Leader development and the dark side of personality. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(3), 495–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hofmeister, M., Lockyer, J., & Crutcher, R. (2008). The acceptability of the multiple mini interview for resident selection. Family Medicine, 40(10), 734–740.Google Scholar
  32. Hojat, M., Erdmann, J. B., & Gonnella, J. S. (2013). Personality assessments and outcomes in medical education and the practice of medicine: AMEE Guide No. 79. Medical Teacher, 35(7), 1267–1301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Huffcutt, A. I., & Arthur, W. (1994). Hunter and hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry-level jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 184–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Humphrey, S., Dowson, S., Wall, D., Diwakar, V., & Goodyear, H. M. (2008). Multiple mini-interviews: Opinions of candidates and interviewers. Medical Education, 42(2), 207–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hurtz, G. M., & Donovan, J. J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jansen, P. G., & Stoop, B. A. (2001). The dynamics of assessment center validity: Results of a 7-year study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kapes, J. T., & Strickler, R. E. (1975). A longitudinal study of change in work values between ninth and twelfth grades as related to high school curriculum. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 6(1), 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kidd, J., Fuller, J., & Patterson, F. (2006). Selection centres: Initial description of a collaborative pilot project. In Proceedings for the Association for Medical Education in Europe (AMEE). Google Scholar
  39. Klehe, U.-C. (2004). Choosing how to choose: Institutional pressures affecting the adoption of personnel selection procedures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12(4), 327–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Knights, J., & Kennedy, B. (2006). Medical school selection: Screening for dysfunctional tendencies. Medical Education, 40, 1058–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Knights, J., & Kennedy, B. (2007). Medical school selection: Impact of dysfunctional tendencies on academic performance. Medical Education, 41(4), 362–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Koczwara, A., & Ashworth, V. (2013). Selection and Assessment. In R. Lewis & L. Zibarras (Eds.), Work and occupational psychology: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 295–342). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Kumar, K., Roberts, C., Rothnie, I., et al. (2009). Experiences of the multiple mini-interview: A qualitative analysis. Medical Education, 43(4), 360–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Landers, R. N., Sackett, P. R., & Tuzinski, K. A. (2011). Retesting after initial failure, coaching rumors, and warnings against faking in online personality measures for selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1), 202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lievens, F. (2013). Adjusting medical school admission: Assessing interpersonal skills using situational judgement tests. Medical Education, 47(2), 182–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lievens, F., Coetsier, P., De Fruyt, F., & De Maeseneer, J. (2002). Medical students’ personality characteristics and academic performance: A five-factor model perspective. Medical Education, 36(11), 1050–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lievens, F., Ones, D. S., & Dilchert, S. (2009). Personality scale validities increase throughout medical school. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1514–1535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lievens, F., & Patterson, F. (2011). The validity and incremental validity of knowledge tests, low-fidelity simulations, and high-fidelity simulations for predicting job performance in advanced-level high-stakes selection. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 927–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McCarthy, J. M., & Goffin, R. D. (2001). Improving the validity of letters of recommendation: An investigation of three standardized reference forms. Military Psychology, 13(4), 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. McDaniel, M., Whetzel, D. L., Schmidt, F., & Maurer, S. D. (1994). The validity of employment interviews: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 599–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Morgeson, F. P., Campion, M. A., Dipboye, R. L., Hollenbeck, J. R., Murphy, K., & Schmitt, N. (2007a). Reconsidering the use of personality tests in personnel selection contexts. Personnel Psychology, 60(3), 683–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Morgeson, F. P., Campion, M. A., Dipboye, R. L., Hollenbeck, J. R., Murphy, K., & Schmitt, N. (2007b). Are we getting fooled again? Coming to terms with limitations in the use of personality tests for personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 60(4), 1029–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Motowidlo, S. J., & Beier, M. E. (2010). Differentiating specific job knowledge from implicit trait policies in procedural knowledge measured by a situational judgment test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(2), 321–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Munro, D. (1998). Assessing interpersonal sensitivity in a professional context: Some initial indicators. Australian Psychological Society Annual Conference, Melbourne, 1997. Australian Journal of Psychology, 50, 106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Munro, D., Bore, M., & Powis, D. (2005). Personality factors in professional ethical behaviour: Studies of empathy and narcissism. Australian Journal of Psychology, 57(1), 49–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. NPSCC factsheet. (2013). Value based interviewing: Keep children safer through recruitment.Google Scholar
  57. O’Connor, M. C., & Paunonen, S. V. (2007). Big Five personality predictors of post-secondary academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(5), 971–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Oishi, S., Schimmack, U., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1998). The measurement of values and individualism–collectivism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1177–1189.Google Scholar
  59. Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Judge, T. A. (2007). In support of personality assessment in organizational settings. Personnel Psychology, 60(4), 995–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Oosterveld, P., & ten Cate, O. (2004). Generalizability of a study sample assessment procedure for entrance selection for medical school. Medical Teacher, 26(7), 635–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ostroff, C., & Zhan, Y. (2012). Person–environment fit in the selection process. In N. Schmidt (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of personnel assessment and selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Ouimet, G. (2010). Dynamics of narcissistic leadership in organisations: Towards an integrated research model. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25, 713–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Parks, L., & Guay, R. P. (2009). Personality, values, and motivation. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(7), 675–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Patterson, F., Ashworth, V., Zibarras, L., Coan, P., Kerrin, M., & O’Neill, P. (2012). Evaluations of situational judgement tests to assess non-academic attributes in selection. Medical Education, 46(9), 850–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Patterson, F., & Ferguson, E. (2010). Selection for medical education and training. New York: Wiley Online Library.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Patterson, F., Ferguson, E., Lane, P., Farrell, K., Martlew, J., & Wells, A. (2000). A competency model for general practice: Implications for selection, training, and development. The British Journal of General Practice, 50, 188–193.Google Scholar
  67. Patterson, F., Ferguson, E., Norfolk, T., & Lane, P. (2005). A new selection system to recruit general practice registrars: Preliminary findings from a validation study. British Medical Journal, 330(7493), 711–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Patterson, F., Ferguson, E., & Thomas, S. (2008). Using job analysis to identify core and specific competencies: Implications for selection and recruitment. Medical Education, 42, 1195–1204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Patterson, F., Knight, A., Dowell, J., Nicholson, S., Cousans, F., & Cleleand, J. (2015). How effective are selection methods in medical eduction and training? Evidence from a systematic review. Medical Education. Google Scholar
  70. Patterson, F., Lievens, F., Kerrin, M., Munro, N., & Irish, B. (2013). The predictive validity of selection for entry into postgraduate training in general practice: Evidence from three longitudinal studies. The British Journal of General Practice: The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 63(616), 734–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Patterson, F., & Zibarras, L. (2011). Exploring the construct of perceived job discrimination in selection. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19(3), 259–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Patterson, F., Zibarras, L., Carr, V., Irish, B., & Gregory, S. (2011). Evaluating candidate reactions to selection practices using organisational justice theory. Medical Education, 45(3), 289–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Pau, A., Jeevaratnam, K., Chen, Y. S., Fall, A. A., Khoo, C., & Nadarajah, V. D. (2013). The multiple mini-interview (MMI) for student selection in health professions training—A systematic review. Medical Teacher, 35(12), 1027–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Plint, S., & Patterson, F. (2010). Identifying critical success factors for designing selection processes into postgraduate specialty training: The case of UK general practice. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 86(1016), 323–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Poole, P. J., Moriarty, H. J., Wearn, A. M., Wilkinson, T. J., & Weller, J. M. (2009). Medical student selection in New Zealand: Looking to the future. The New Zealand Medical Journal, 122(1306), 88–100.Google Scholar
  76. Powis, D., Bore, M., Munro, D., & Lumsden, M. A. (2005). Development of the personal qualities assessment as a tool for selecting medical students. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 11(1), 3–14.Google Scholar
  77. Prideaux, D., Roberts, C., Eva, K., Centeno, A., McCrorie, P., McManus, C., & Wilkinson, D. (2011). Assessment for selection for the health care professions and specialty training: Consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference. Medical Teacher, 33(3), 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Randall, R., Davies, H., Patterson, F., & Farrell, K. (2006a). Selecting doctors for post-graduate training in paediatrics using a competency-based assessment centre. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 91, 444–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Randall, R., Stewart, P., Farrell, K., & Patterson, F. (2006b). Using an assessment centre to select doctors for postgraduate training in obstetrics and gynaecology. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist, 8(4), 257–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Ravlin, E. C., & Meglino, B. M. (1987). Issues in work values measurement. In L. Preston (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy (pp. 153–183). Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  81. Razack, S., Faremo, S., Drolet, F., et al. (2009). Multiple mini-interviews versus traditional interviews: Stakeholder acceptability comparison. Medical Education, 43(10), 993–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Rosenfeld, J. M., Reiter, H. I., Trinh, K., & Eva, K. W. (2008). A cost efficiency comparison between the multiple mini-interview and traditional admissions interviews. Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice, 13(1), 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Rosenthal, S. A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2006). Narcissistic leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 617–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Roth, P., & Iddekinge, C. (2005). Personality saturation in structured interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 261–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Salgado, J., Anderson, N., Moscoso, S., et al. (2003). A meta-analytic study of general mental ability validity for different occupations in the European community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(6), 1068–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S. (2002). Comprehensive meta-analysis of the construct validity of the employment interview. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11(3), 299–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Salgado, J. F., & Táuriz, G. (2014). The Five-Factor Model, forced-choice personality inventories and performance: A comprehensive meta-analysis of academic and occupational validity studies. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(1), 3–30.Google Scholar
  88. Schneider, B. (1978). Person–situation selection: A review of some ability–situation interaction research. Personnel Psychology, 31(2), 281–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40(3), 437–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Schneider, B., Goldstein, H. W., & Smith, D. B. (1995). The ASA framework: An update. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 747–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 1–65). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  92. Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 3–4.Google Scholar
  93. Stedman, J. M., Hatch, J. P., & Schoenfeld, L. S. (2009). Letters of recommendation for the predoctoral internship in medical schools and other settings: Do they enhance decision making in the selection process? Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 16(4), 339–345.Google Scholar
  94. Steiner, D. D., & Gilliland, S. W. (1996). Fairness reactions to personnel selection techniques in France and the United States. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(2), 134–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Terpstra, D. A., Mohamed, A. A., & Kethley, R. B. (1999). An analysis of federal court cases involving nine selection devices. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 7(1), 26–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Tett, R. P., & Christiansen, N. D. (2007). Personality tests at the crossroads: A response to Morgeson, Campion, Dipboye, Hollenbeck, Murphy, and Schmitt (2007). Personnel Psychology, 60(4), 967–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., Rothstein, M., & Reddon, J. R. (1999). Meta-analysis of bidirectional relations in personality–job performance research. Human Performance, 12(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Tran, T., & Blackman, M. C. (2006). The dynamics and validity of the group selection interview. The Journal of Social Psychology, 146(2), 183–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Trost, G., Nauels, H. U., & Klieme, E. (1998). The relationship between different criteria for admission to medical school and student success. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(2), 247–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. White, J., Brownell, K., Lemay, J. F., & Lockyer, J. M. (2012). “What do they want me to say?” The hidden curriculum at work in the medical school selection process: A qualitative study. BMC Medical Education, 12, 17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Williamson, L. G., Campion, J. E., Malos, S. B., Roehling, M. V., & Campion, M. A. (1997). Employment interview on trial: Linking interview structure with litigation outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 900–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Zibarras, L., & Woods, S. A. (2010). A survey of UK selection practices across different organization sizes and industry sectors. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 499–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Ziv, A., Rubin, O., Moshinsky, A., Gafni, N., Kotler, M., Dagan, Y., et al. (2008). MOR: A simulation-based assessment centre for evaluating the personal and interpersonal qualities of medical school candidates. Medical Education, 42(10), 991–998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fiona Patterson
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Linda Prescott-Clements
    • 3
  • Lara Zibarras
    • 4
  • Helena Edwards
    • 2
  • Maire Kerrin
    • 2
  • Fran Cousans
    • 2
  1. 1.University of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  2. 2.Work Psychology GroupPride Park, DerbyUK
  3. 3.University of NorthumbriaNewcastle upon TyneUK
  4. 4.City University LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations