Final answer:
To evaluate the reliability of a structured interview, one can use test-retest reliability, which assesses consistency over time, and inter-rater reliability, which checks if different raters give consistent scores.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question pertains to evaluating the reliability of a structured interview. Reliability refers to the consistency of a measure over time. The reliability of structured interviews can be assessed using two research designs: test-retest reliability and inter-rater reliability. Test-retest reliability ensures that the outcomes of the structured interview remain consistent over multiple administrations. For example, Beutler, Nussbaum, and Meredith (1988) conducted a study involving the MMPI assessment tool administered to police officers at different intervals, illustrating a form of test-retest reliability analysis. Inter-rater reliability, on the other hand, assesses the degree to which different interviewers agree on their evaluations based on a structured interview, ensuring that the ratings are not subjective or biased. An example of this can be seen in the study by Ross et al. (1990), which collected structured interview data from multiple personality disorder cases across four centers.
A structured interview is a research design that involves asking the same set of questions to every participant in a systematic manner, using a standardized rating system to assess their responses. This approach allows for accurate comparison of interviews and is found to be more effective at predicting job performance. An example of a study that used structured interviews is the one conducted by McDaniel, Whetzel, Schmidt & Maurer (1994) to examine the effectiveness of different types of job interviews.