[SOLVED] Discussion 2: Interviewing vs. Testing

I’m working on a Psychology exercise and need support.

Fair and accurate decision-making has long been a goal of psychological testing. The earliest known uses of psychological tests were civil service exams, established in China 2000 years ago. These tests helped to assess individual ability, establishing an arguably fairer way to select capable employees and de-emphasize rank and personal connections.

Nevertheless, decisions about people are not always made by using psychological tests. Decisions are often made by using subjective procedures, such as interviews. Examine the following scenario and consider whether, for this situation, interviewing or psychological testing might be a more effective evaluative method.

The warden at a prison where you work has discovered that parole decisions made by a panel of interviewers often turn out to be wrong, with released prisoners often committing crimes and retained prisoners often demonstrating model behavior. The warden asks the prison psychologist to make a recommendation regarding whether parole decisions should be made on specific test batteries or interviews. Assuming that you need to choose one or the other, what would you recommend as a method for deciding parole—a test battery or the panel interview?

With these thoughts in mind:

Post by Day 4 a brief explanation of differences between objective (testing) and subjective (interviewing) methods. Then provide your position, based on the scenario provided, on whether interviewing or psychological testing is a more effective evaluative method. Support your response using the Learning Resources and the current literature.

Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources, Zero plagiarizing, APA format, Quote work, No.com’s