The aim of a job interview is to allow an interviewer to judge whether an applicant will fit into the job at stake. This study investigated how various constructs (for instance, preinterview impressions, professional competencies, and attraction to applicants) influence interviewers' judgment of applicants. The data were obtained from 49 qualitative interviews with job interviewers about their judgment of applicants. Attraction to the applicant was considered the most important construct in interviewers' judgment processes, despite the fact that this has little to do with an applicant's job performance. The study argues that interviewers' judgment processes are problematic, and that this is not due to poor interviewers. Instead, the very concept of the job interview leads to interviewers' use of problematic constructs. The qualitative approach in the study provides insight into the way in which specific job interviewers judge applicants. Such insight cannot be gained from a quantitative approach, which has traditionally been used in job interview research. Finally, the study will provide a critical discussion of the psychological reasons for job interviewers' use of problematic constructs in their decision making process.

While a large body of research has investigated cultural differences in behavior, this typical study assesses a single behavioral outcome, in a single context, compared across two countries. The current study compared a broad array of behaviors across 21 countries ( N = 5,522). Participants described their behavior at 7:00 p.m. the previous evening using the 68 items of the Riverside Behavioral Q-sort (RBQ). Correlations between average patterns of behavior in each country ranged from r = .69 to r = .97 and, in general, described a positive and relaxed activity. The most similar patterns were United States/Canada and least similar were Japan/United Arab Emirates (UAE). Similarities in behavior within countries were largest in Spain and smallest in the UAE. Further analyses correlated average RBQ item placements in each country with, among others, country-level value dimensions, personality traits, self-esteem levels, economic output, and population. Extroversion, openness, neuroticism, conscientiousness, self-esteem, happiness, and tolerant attitudes yielded more significant correlations than expected by chance.

Most studies using personality inventories do not take individual, subjective understandings of the items into account. The present study is one of the few to have investigated the quality of individuals' psychological processes when making the Likert-like responses often used in psychological inventories. Respondents were asked to elaborate verbally on their Likert item responses to the 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory. A common assumption about personality inventories is that there is a relatively homogenous understanding of the items and, in particular, the rating scales across respondents. However, our results suggest that the same itemresponses to a given item can reflect a variety of qualities across individuals' understandings. At the same time, similar understandings and ways of relating to an item can lead to different item responses. Such findings have substantial implications for quantitative personality studies as well as quantitative survey or questionnaire studies, in general.

The purpose of this research is to quantitatively compare everyday situational experience around the world. Local collaborators recruited 5,447 members of college communities in 20 countries, who provided data via a Web site in 14 languages. Using the 89 items of the Riverside Situational Q-sort (RSQ), participants described the situation they experienced the previous evening at 7:00 p.m. Correlations among the average situational profiles of each country ranged from r = .73 to r = .95; the typical situation was described as largely pleasant. Most similar were the United States/Canada; least similar were South Korea/Denmark. Japan had the most homogenous situational experience; South Korea, the least. The 15 RSQ items varying the most across countries described relatively negative aspects of situational experience; the 15 least varying items were more positive. Further analyses correlated RSQ items with national scores on six value dimensions, the Big Five traits, economic output, and population. Individualism, Neuroticism, Openness, and Gross Domestic Product yielded more significant correlations than expected by chance. Psychological research traditionally has paid more attention to the assessment of persons than of situations, a discrepancy that extends to cross-cultural psychology. The present study demonstrates how cultures vary in situational experience in psychologically meaningful ways.

The purpose of this research is to quantitatively compare everyday situational experience around the world. Local collaborators recruited 5,447 members of college communities in 20 countries, who provided data via a Web site in 14 languages. Using the 89 items of the Riverside Situational Q-sort (RSQ), participants described the situation they experienced the previous evening at 7:00 p.m. Correlations among the average situational profiles of each country ranged from r = .73 to r=.95; the typical situation was described as largely pleasant. Most similar were the United States/Canada; least similar were South Korea/Denmark. Japan had the most homogenous situational experience; South Korea, the least. The 15 RSQ items varying the most across countries described relatively negative aspects of situational experience; the 15 least varying items were more positive. Further analyses correlated RSQ items with national scores on six value dimensions, the Big Five traits, economic output, and population. Individualism, Neuroticism, Openness, and Gross Domestic Product yielded more significant correlations than expected by chance. Psychological research traditionally has paid more attention to the assessment of persons than of situations, a discrepancy that extends to cross-cultural psychology. The present study demonstrates how cultures vary in situational experience in psychologically meaningful ways.