Finding your dream job, researching company information and finally submitting an application — all of this is often done via smartphones these days. It's no wonder that now also in the Staff selection mobile-optimized selection processes are becoming increasingly important (Nikou & Economides, 2018). So-called game-based assessments in particular are becoming increasingly popular.
Under gamified or Game-based assessments Do you understand Playfully prepared psychological test methods. The idea behind these test methods is that results in psychometrically developed mini-games allow conclusions to be drawn about the cognitive, social and personality-based characteristics of applicants. Scientific studies suggest that this is indeed possible (e.g. Brown et al. 2014). In the same way, more and more large companies such as LinkedIn, Tesla, McKinsey, or deloitte on this new method of personnel selection.
Play on your smartphone instead of test procedures lasting several hours and long journeys
That sounds good so far, but are the procedures really suitable for distinguishing between suitable and unsuitable applicants? This question is currently on the minds of many HR managers. They are often even more skeptical of the processes. Justified skepticism or overslept about a trend? Time to take a closer look at these methods in terms of key scientific test quality criteria. Because only when these criteria are met can we speak of a scientifically based test procedure (Kubinger, 2019).
We want the three main quality criteria of classical test theory (objectivity, reliability, validity) and two important ancillary quality criteria Take a closer look at (fairness, economics).
objectivity
Objectivity of a test procedure exists when different HR managers to the same assessment come from an applicant. Risks to objectivity arise above all in a classic job interview. In this way, the judgments of HR managers can be influenced by various aspects, such as the perceived sympathy for the applicant. This results in a distorted image the applicant's abilities and personality traits — the process is not objective. This is where one of the key benefits of game-based assessments comes into play. Because through the technology-based implementation and automated test evaluation, which make use of the latest findings in the area of machine learning, can reduce numerous sources of error — the objectivity of the process increases. One disadvantage of game-based assessments, on the other hand, is that there is no certainty as to whether the player is actually the applicant and not someone else (also known as”Impersonation“referred to). However, this problem exists in all selection processes carried out online and is one of the reasons why game-based assessments have so far been used primarily in candidate pre-selection.
Reliability
Another important quality criterion is the reliability of a test procedure. This describes the extent to which a test is a characteristic (e.g. a cognitive ability or a personality trait) measures accurately (i.e. without measurement errors). As a rule, this works better the more data is available about this person. This can be illustrated with a simple example: Imagine you are carrying out a concentration test after a long, stressful day at work. You will also be disturbed by loud music from your neighbors. The test result will therefore probably not reflect your actual ability to concentrate (so-called “traits”), but rather represent a situational and temporary measurement of this (so-called “state”, see Fleeson 2001). Because you will certainly do worse than on a day when you are well rested and undisturbed. However, if your ability to concentrate is measured on different days, such random measurement errors are increasingly compensated for. In statistics, this is also known as the central limit theorem. This is exactly where the idea of game-based assessments comes in. Instead of drawing conclusions about the applicant's ability to concentrate from a single test result, Saved and averaged the results of various game runs. This results in a more accurate estimate the applicant's actual ability to concentrate (trait).
Validity
But a process should of course not only measure precisely, but also The right thing (Validity). When it comes to personnel selection, you are primarily at the Predictive validity interested — the test should therefore predict a specific variable as precisely as possible. A commonly used variable is the applicant's future work performance. Similar to reliability and objectivity, there are various sources of error that can have a negative effect on predictive validity. For one thing, here are Response trends to name the applicants. A particular problem with the use of classic test methods is social desirability Dar. This is the tendency of applicants to consciously select answers that present them in a positive light. This is particularly important if the The aim of the test is easy to understand is. And this is often the case, particularly in personality diagnostics. As an example, let's take a look at a statement from the Big Five, one of the well-known methods in personality diagnostics (Asendorpf & Neyer, 2012). Applicants are asked to state their agreement with the following statement:
“I see myself as someone who is reliable and conscientious. ”
It is obvious that only a few people would deny such a statement in the application process for their dream job. So whether the item is suitable for to distinguish between conscientious and unconscientious applicants, is questionable.
However, applicants do not always actively try to manipulate the results. Just as often, they simply have difficulty assessing their own personality traits, strengths, and weaknesses. Because what does conscientious or extrovert be? And how conscientious or extrovert am I actually? This is often not so easy to answer and is also referred to in psychology as a lack The ability to introspect referred to. To simplify the question, applicants often compare themselves with people in their environment. This primarily answers the question: How conscientious or extroverted am I compared to the people around me? A number of scientific studies show that this change in the question often leads to distortions (e.g. Schwarz, 1999).
Game-based assessments avoid exactly this problem
Instead of relying solely on the applicant's self-disclosure, the mini-games also record the applicants' behavioral nuances. For example, the applicants' preference for Speed versus accuracy observed in the individual games. The behavioral nuances recorded in this way are then used to supplement the applicant's error-prone self-assessment with objective data. Optimum weighting of the data is achieved with the help of intelligent self-learning algorithms. Recording actual behavior instead of relying solely on the applicant's statement — sounds logical right? And scientific research also shows that this approach leads to more valid results when recording many characteristics than pure self-assessment (e.g. Baumeister et al., 2007).
Test fairness
Another important quality criterion is test fairness. For example, no group should be systematically disadvantaged in a test procedure (e.g. based on gender or ethnic background). However, this is the case with many test methods, as questions are aimed at Western cultures, for example (Camilli, 2006). Gender, ethnic background and skin color — however, this plays no role in the test results of the largely language-free mini-games. There is also no scientific evidence to date for the concern that people with gaming experience could benefit from editing. Aptitude diagnostic procedures Only evaluate the factors that are relevant to work success and omit irrelevant characteristics, such as gender or social background. This creates more fairness and equal opportunities.
Testökonomie
The last criterion considered, the test economy, was briefly addressed at the outset. Selection processes should be characterized by a short period of time, low costs and low effort for the applicant. Game-based assessments follow the idea of a “zero-footprint” measurement — there is virtually no longer a burden for applicants — instead, the games often even do the right thing fun. Since the individual tasks can be individually adapted to the applicant with the help of intelligent algorithms (this is also known as adaptive testing), the games are also not boring. But it is not only applicants who benefit, but also companies. So are they Cost and time saving potential compared to other test methods (e.g. Assessment center) huge. This is particularly true for very heterogeneous and international target groups.
Download now for free: Our tabular overview of the key sources of error in vocational aptitude diagnostics and how to address them through game-based assessments.
conclusion
The examination shows that it is the modern processes certainly be able to take up with established psychometric methods. Because fun, measurement accuracy, validity and fairness — these factors don't have to be mutually exclusive. In combination, they contribute to personnel selection that is based on scientific standards and meets the changing needs of a new target group.
However, it is not always easy to implement all test quality criteria in practice. For example, many psychometric games on the market do not meet the above quality criteria (König et al., 2010). The procedures should therefore be critically reviewed before they are used as part of professional personnel selection. DIN 33430 for vocational aptitude diagnostics creates an important frame of reference here
