Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T14:04:20.362Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Moving Beyond the Challenges to Make Unproctored Internet Testing a Reality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Robert E. Gibby*
Affiliation:
Procter & Gamble
Dan Ispas
Affiliation:
University of South Florida
Rodney A. McCloy
Affiliation:
Human Resources Research Organization
Andrew Biga
Affiliation:
Procter & Gamble
*
E-mail: gibby.re@pg.com, Address: Procter & Gamble, 2 P&G Plaza, TN5-125, Cincinnati, OH 45202

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2009 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Department of Psychology, University of South Florida

**

Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO).

References

Biga, A., Pratt, A. K., Gibby, R. E. & Irwin, J. L. (2007, May). Cross-cultural differences in applicant reactions to online cognitive ability items. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the Society of Industrial Organizational Psychology, New York.Google Scholar
Gibby, R. E., Sestak, N. J., Pratt, A. K., & Irwin, J. L. (2006, May). Candidate reactions to messaging and assessments of a global selection system. Practitioner forum conducted at the annual meeting of the Society of Industrial Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX.Google Scholar
Ryan, A. M., Boyce, A. S., Ghumman, S., Jundt, D., Schmidt, G., & Gibby, R. E. (in press). Going global: Cultural values and perceptions of selection procedures. Applied Psychology: An International Review.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, 210.Google Scholar