APA 6th Edition Obradović, J. (1966). Modifikacija metode prisilnog izbora kao kriterija uspješnosti u radu. Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju, 17 (4), 433-446. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/178394
MLA 8th Edition Obradović, J.. "Modifikacija metode prisilnog izbora kao kriterija uspješnosti u radu." Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju, vol. 17, br. 4, 1966, str. 433-446. https://hrcak.srce.hr/178394. Citirano 26.05.2019.
Chicago 17th Edition Obradović, J.. "Modifikacija metode prisilnog izbora kao kriterija uspješnosti u radu." Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju 17, br. 4 (1966): 433-446. https://hrcak.srce.hr/178394
Harvard Obradović, J. (1966). 'Modifikacija metode prisilnog izbora kao kriterija uspješnosti u radu', Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju, 17(4), str. 433-446. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/178394 (Datum pristupa: 26.05.2019.)
Vancouver Obradović J. Modifikacija metode prisilnog izbora kao kriterija uspješnosti u radu. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol. [Internet]. 1966 [pristupljeno 26.05.2019.];17(4):433-446. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/178394
IEEE J. Obradović, "Modifikacija metode prisilnog izbora kao kriterija uspješnosti u radu", Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju, vol.17, br. 4, str. 433-446, 1966. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/178394. [Citirano: 26.05.2019.]
Sažetak Among numerous methods used today for evaluating proficiency on the job the method of forced choice seems best. However, the method has been criticized by many authors as expensive, its construction as time-consuming while the results obtained did not seem to justify the effort and financial means invested. We have therefore tried to modify the forced-choice method in order to shorten the duration of construction and at the same time to increase the validity of the method. In our first modification only the items referring to the traits characteristic of all jobs were used. The forced-choice rating method was thus constructed for three large categories: workers, employees and supervisors - separately for each group. In the construction of the method we also performed the second - to our opinion - fundamental modification. To construct a method of forced choice H it is necessary to have two indices: preference index and discrimination index. To obtain preference index for workers, employees and supervisors separately a group of 60 supervisors rated on a nine-point rating scale to what extent each of 250 items obtained by interviewing supervisors is favourable or relevant. Arithmetic means of ratings represented the preference index of a group. To obtain discrimination index two groups of 30 raters each evaluated separately for workers, employees and supervisors to what extent each item was associated with a very efficient or inefficient worker. The difference was obtained by 2 - test 2 X 7 tables. The value of 2 represented discrimination index. From all items two forced-choice rating forms were devised: the first and modified form including only items with preference index within the interval x + s i. e. neutral items some of which being discriminative according to the discrimination index and the second unmodified form with preference index within the whole interval. Both forms were used into rate 250 workers on different jobs, 97 supervisors and 100 employees. Besides, the official rating system of the factory was also used. To compare the validity of the two systems correlations between each system and the forced distribution used as criterion were calculated. The followlng results were obtained: for workers the correlation between the forced distribution as criterion and the standard forced choice was rq = 0,53 P < 0,01, between the forced distribution and modified forced choice rq = 0,77 P < 0,01, between the forced distribution and official rating system rq = 0,49 P < 0,01. For supervisors correlations between the forced distribution as criterion and the three rating systems whose validity was checked were the following: rq=0,54 P < 0,01, 1·rq = 0,55 P < 0,01 and rq = 0,13 P > 0,05. The following correlation coefficients were obtained for employees: rq = 0,37 P < 0,01, rq = 0,82 P < 0,01· and rq = 0,14 P > 0,05. Checking the differences among correlations by means of T-test it was proved that the modified forced-choice rating is really more valid than ·the unmodified form and official rating system. The modified forced choice proved more valid by checking the differences between arithmetic means of workers, employees and supervisors in the three rating systems.