Comparing Scoring Methods for Situational Judgment Tests in International Student Selection: Examinations of Criterion‐Related Validity and Ethnic Subgroup Differences

ABSTRACT Situational judgment tests (SJTs) are increasingly recognized as effective tools for student selection in higher education. However, no research has examined how scoring methods affect the validity and fairness of SJTs for students, especially in international settings. This study aims to evaluate how different scoring methods affect the criterion‐related validity of student SJTs and the ethnic subgroup differences. A total of 311 students from universities in the U.S. and China completed the student SJTs. The findings reveal that mode consensus and proportion consensus exhibit relatively higher criterion‐related validity than traditional scoring methods. However, dichotomous consensus performed better than other scoring methods, including mode consensus and proportion consensus in reducing subgroup differences. The study provides valuable insights for enhancing the validity and fairness of SJTs in student selection processes across cultural contexts.