Selecting Conduct After Capture instructors : validating the CAC Instructor Assessment Centre and examining the potential value of emotional intelligence as a predictor

Abstract

Reliably and defensibly selecting people using tests imitating a job's duties is incorporated into standard Assessment Centres while combining psychometric testing with AC procedures increases AC predictive validity (Catano, et al., 2005; Terpstra, et al., 1999). This study examined the Conduct After Capture (CAC) Instructor AC's factor structure and its ability to predict CAC instructor course performance and two Emotional Intelligence (ET) measures' ability to predict CAC instructor course performance. The AC's validity ( N =124) using a Principal Components Analysis failed to support the 11 hypothesized competencies, but supported a 4-component, methods-based structure. Components demonstrated low convergent validity and high discriminant validity. Secondly, a sample of 44 participants completed the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso El Test (MSCEIT) and the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i). This research suggests that the AC does not consistently assess constructs. However, the 4 (methods) components predicts course performance, after controlling for cognitive ability. Assessors' tendency to focus on methods raises concerns regarding AC construct validity. Future research should consider redefining competencies and examining a larger data sample and precise course measures.