Rule-based versus feedback-based coaching for situational judgment tests

The use of situational judgment tests (SJTs) in high-stakes selection contexts has led to the emergence of commercial coaching programs aimed at increasing individuals' performance. The present study uses a pre-post experimental design to investigate coaching effects on an SJT's mean score and relationships with external variables. General strategies with which to guide how respondents answer SJT questions were developed for rule-based coaching. Item-level feedback was provided for feedback-based coaching. Results suggest that (a) both rule-based and feedback-based coaching are similarly effective at increasing mean SJT scores, (b) coaching does not detract from the SJT's ability to correlate with other variables, and (c) knowledge of ineffective behaviors are more coachable than knowledge of effective behaviors.