Situation assessment as an ignored factor in the behavioral consistency paradigm underlying the validity of personnel selection procedures.

This study contributes to the literature on why selection procedures that are based on the behavioral consistency logic (e.g., structured interviews and assessment centers) are valid predictors of job performance. We rely on interactionist theories to propose that individual differences in assessing situational demands explain true variance in performance in selection procedures and on the job. Results from 124 individuals in a simulated selection process showed that the assessment of situational demands was related to both selection and job performance. Individual differences in assessing situational demands also contributed to the criterion-related validity of assessment center and structured interview ratings, offering a complementary explanation as to why selection procedures based on the notion of behavioral consistency predict job performance.