No abstract

PurposeDue to the paucity of research on web-based job applicant screening (i.e. cybervetting), the purpose of the current study was to examine the psychometric properties of cybervetting, including an examination of the impact of adding structure to the rating process.Design/methodology/approachUsing a mixed-factorial design, 122 supervisors conducted cybervetting evaluations of applicant personality, cognitive ability, written communication skills, professionalism, and overall suitability. Cross-method agreement (i.e. the degree of similarity between cybervetting ratings and other assessment methods), as well as interrater reliability and agreement were examined, and unstructured versus structured cybervetting rating formats were compared.FindingsCybervetting assessments demonstrated high interrater reliability and interrater agreement, but only limited evidence of cross-method agreement was provided. In addition, adding structure to the cybervetting process did not enhance the psychometric properties of this assessment technique.Practical implicationsThis study highlighted that whereas cybervetting raters demonstrated a high degree of consensus in cybervetting-based attributions, there may be concerns regarding assessment accuracy, as cybervetting-based ratings generally differed from applicant test scores and self-assessment ratings. Thus, employers should use caution when utilizing this pre-employment screening technique.Originality/valueWhereas previous research has suggested that cybervetting ratings demonstrate convergence with other traditional assessments (albeit with relatively small effects), these correlational links do not provide information regarding cross-method agreement or method interchangeability. Thus, this study bridges a crucial gap in the literature by examining cross-method agreement for a variety of job-relevant constructs, as well as empirically testing the impact of adding structure to the cybervetting rating process.

No abstract