Skip to main content

Digitalisierte und remote durchgeführte Assessment Center

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Digitale Personalauswahl und Eignungsdiagnostik

Zusammenfassung

Dieses Kapitel gibt einen Überblick über zentrale Unterschiede und Herausforderungen von remote bzw. digitalisiert durchgeführten Assessment Centern (Remote-ACs) im Vergleich zu vor Ort durchgeführten ACs. Dabei werden relevante theoretische Konzepte, generelle Herausforderungen und übungsspezifische Aspekte sowie die überschaubare wissenschaftliche Befundlage zu diesen ACs vorgestellt. Daraus leiten wir konkrete Hinweise ab, welche Aspekte bei der Nutzung von Remote-ACs beachtet werden sollten und wie möglichen nachteiligen Effekten vorgebeugt werden kann.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  • Arbeitskreis Assessment Center. (2016). AC-Standards. Standards der Assessment Center Methode. https://www.forum-assessment.de/images/standards/AkAC-Standards-2016.pdf. Zugriffsdatum am 12.12.2023

  • Arthur, W., Jr., Doverspike, D., Muñoz, G. J., Taylor, J. E., & Carr, A. E. (2014). The use of mobile devices in high-stakes remotely delivered assessments and testing. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 22(2), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, W., Jr., Keiser, N. L., & Doverspike, D. (2018). An information-processing-based conceptual framework of the effects of unproctored internet-based testing devices on scores on employment-related assessments and tests. Human Performance, 31(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2017.1403441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailenson, J. N. (2021). Nonverbal overload: A theoretical argument for the causes of Zoom fatigue. Technology, Mind, and Behavior, 2(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1037/tmb0000030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basch, J. M., & Melchers, K. G. (2021). Technologie-mediierte Interviews: Lessons learned und offene Fragen. Wirtschaftspsychologie, 23(4), 6–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basch, J. M., Melchers, K. G., Kurz, A., Krieger, M., & Miller, L. (2021). It takes more than a good camera: Which factors contribute to differences between face-to-face interviews and videoconference interviews regarding performance ratings and interviewee perceptions? Journal of Business and Psychology, 36(5), 921–940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-020-09714-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Basch, J. M., Melchers, K. G., & Büttner, J. C. (2022). Preselection in the digital age: A comparison of perceptions of asynchronous video interviews with online tests and online application documents in a simulation context. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 30(4), 639–652. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12403

  • Bill, B., & Melchers, K. G. (2023). Selbstdarstellungsverhalten in eignungsdiagnostischen Interviews – Was Sie gegen Faking und Impression Management tun können. In S. Schulte & M. Hiltmann (Hrsg.), Eignungsdiagnostische Interviews: Standards der professionellen Interviewführung (S. 133–151). Springer Gabler.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Blacksmith, N., Willford, J. C., & Behrend, T. S. (2016). Technology in the employment interview: A meta-analysis and future research agenda. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 2(1), 12–20. https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2016.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briscoe, D. R. (1997). Assessment centers: Cross-cultural and cross-national issues. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12(5), 261–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 191–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, M., Gottlieb, M., Wooten, D., Stojan, J., Haas, M. R. C., Bailey, J., et al. (2022). Virtual interviewing for graduate medical education recruitment and selection: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 80. Medical Teacher, 44(12), 1313–1331. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2022.2130038

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fiechter, J. L., Fealing, C., Gerrard, R., & Kornell, N. (2018). Audiovisual quality impacts assessments of job candidates in video interviews: Evidence for an AV quality bias. Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications, 3(1), 47. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-018-0139-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, C., Van Iddekinge, C. H., & Vaughn, D. (2021). Hiring during a pandemic: Insights from the front lines of research and practice. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 14(1–2), 105–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2021.8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hessemer, M., & Höft, S. (2022, Mai 05.–07). Personalauswahl in Zeiten von Corona: Praktikerbefragung [Konferenzvortrag]. 25. Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für angewandte Wirtschaftspsychologie, Köln.

    Google Scholar 

  • Illingworth, A. J., Morelli, N. A., Scott, J. C., & Boyd, S. L. (2015). Internet-based, unproctored assessments on mobile and non-mobile devices: Usage, measurement equivalence, and outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30(2), 325–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9363-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaess, W. A., Witryol, S. L., & Nolan, R. E. (1961). Reliability, sex-differences, and validity in the leaderless group discussion technique. Journal of Applied Psychology, 45(5), 345–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanning, U. P., Pöttker, J., & Gelleri, P. (2007). Assessment Center-Praxis in deutschen Großunternehmen. Ein Vergleich zwischen wissenschaftlichem Anspruch und Realität. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, 51(4), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089.51.4.155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knauth, P., & Rutenfranz, J. (1987). Arbeitszeitgestaltung. In U. Kleinbeck & J. Rutenfranz (Hrsg.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie: Arbeitspsychologie (Bd. DIII, 1, S. 532–576). Hogrefe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krause, D. E., & Thornton, G. C. (2009). A cross-cultural look at assessment center practices: Survey results from western Europe and North America. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 58(4), 557–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00371.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, S. (2023). Datenschutzrecht im Interview. In S. H. Schulte, M. (Hrsg.), Eignungsdiagnostische Interviews: Standards der professionellen Interviewführung (S 515–535). Springer Gabler. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-38720-4_22

  • Langer, M., König, C. J., & Krause, K. (2017). Examining digital interviews for personnel selection: Applicant reactions and interviewer ratings. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 25(4), 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, A. D., Kinney, T. B., O’Connell, M. S., Delgado, K., & r. (2017). Stop interrupting me! Examining the relationship between interruptions, test performance and reactions. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 3(1), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2017.002

  • Lievens, F., Van Keer, E., & Volckaert, E. (2010). Gathering behavioral samples through a computerized and standardized assessment center exercise. Yes, it is possible. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9(2), 94–98. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lukacik, E.-R., Bourdage, J. S., & Roulin, N. (2022). Into the void: A conceptual model and research agenda for the design and use of asynchronous video interviews. Human Resource Management Review, 32(1), 100789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2020.100789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melchers, K. G., Ingold, P. V., Kerle, F., & Hörni, A. (2023). Are video resumés a useful selection tool? Influencing factors on evaluations and a preliminary assessment of their validity. Manuscript in preparation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melchers, K. G., Kleinmann, M., & Prinz, M. A. (2010). Do assessors have too much on their plates? The effects of simultaneously rating multiple assessment center candidates on rating quality. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18(3), 329–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00516.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obermann, C. (2021). Remote Assessment Center vs. Traditionelles Assessment Center: Auswirkungen auf den Schwierigkeitsgrad und das Erlebnis der Teilnehmer/-innen. Wirtschaftspsychologie, 23(4), 6–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obermann, C., Höft, S., & Becker, J.-N. (2016). Assessment Center-Praxis 2016: Ergebnisse der aktuellen AkACAnwenderbefragung. In Arbeitskreis Assessment Center e.V (Hrsg.), Was kommt, was bleibt: Personalauswahl und Personalentwicklung zwischen Wandel und Konstanz (S. 663–681). Pabst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollet, B. G., Staffell, I., & Adamson, K.-A. (2015). Current energy landscape in the Republic of South Africa. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 40(46), 16685–16701. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25510-1_3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, D. M., Kavanagh, M. V., Wiseman, B. E., & Hodgins, A. (2023). Effects of background cues on online interview ratings. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 9(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2023.01.003

  • Ratan, R., Miller, D. B., & Bailenson, J. N. (2022). Facial appearance dissatisfaction explains differences in Zoom fatigue. Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking, 25(2), 124–129. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2021.0112

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Riediger, M., & Rolfs, H. (1998). Computergestützte Postkorbverfahren: Mailbox ’90, PC-Office und PC-Postkorb „Seeblick“. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, 42(1), 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, A. M., Daum, D., Bauman, T., Grisez, M., Mattimore, K., Nalodka, T., & McCormick, S. (1995). Direct, indirect, and controlled observation and rating accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(6), 664–670. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.80.6.664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sackett, P. R., Zhang, C., Berry, C. M., & Lievens, F. (2022). Revisiting meta-analytic estimates of validity in personnel selection: Addressing systematic overcorrection for restriction of range. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(11), 2040–2068. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000994

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sears, G. J., Zhang, H. Y., Wiesner, W. H., Hackett, R. D., & Yuan, Y. F. (2013). A comparative assessment of videoconference and face-to-face employment interviews. Management Decision, 51(8), 1733–1752. https://doi.org/10.1108/Md-09-2012-0642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shockley, K. M., Gabriel, A. S., Robertson, D., Rosen, C. C., Chawla, N., Ganster, M. L., & Ezerins, M. E. (2021). The fatiguing effects of camera use in virtual meetings: A within-person field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(8), 1137–1155. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000948

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoshan, H. N., & Wehrt, W. (2022). Understanding “Zoom fatigue”: A mixed-method approach. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 71(3), 827–852. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sianoja, M., Syrek, C. J., de Bloom, J., Korpela, K., & Kinnunen, U. (2018). Enhancing daily well-being at work through lunchtime park walks and relaxation exercises: Recovery experiences as mediators. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 23(3), 428–442. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000083

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tippins, N. T. (2009). Internet alternatives to traditional proctored testing: Where are we now? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2(1), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2008.01097.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Iddekinge, C. H., Raymark, P. H., Roth, P. L., & Payne, H. S. (2006). Comparing the psychometric characteristics of ratings of face-to-face and videotaped structured interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14(4), 347–359. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00356.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vorstand Swiss Assessment. (2020). Sind Remote und Präsenz Assessment Center gleichwertig? https://www.swissassessment.ch/wp-content/uploads/RemoteAC_SwissAss_2020_final.pdf

  • Wegge, J. (2006). Communication via videoconference: Emotional and cognitive consequences of affective personality dispositions, seeing one’s own picture, and disturbing events. Human-Computer Interaction, 21(3), 273–318. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci2103_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenderdel, M., & Kanning, U. P. (2008). Wer mehr weiß beurteilt anders. Personalwirtschaft, 8, 52–54.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harriet Lingel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert an Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Lingel, H., Uhle, T., Melchers, K.G. (2023). Digitalisierte und remote durchgeführte Assessment Center. In: Kanning, U.P., Ohlms, M.L. (eds) Digitale Personalauswahl und Eignungsdiagnostik. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68211-1_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68211-1_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-68210-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-68211-1

  • eBook Packages: Psychology (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics