Situational Judgment Tests: Why Open Response Formats Offer Deeper Insight

August 14, 2026

Situational judgment tests (SJTs) are emerging as essential tools in higher education admissions, particularly for professional and graduate programs, and there’s a strong reason for this trend. 

Designed to assess non-technical attributes, SJTs evaluate social intelligence and professionalism that knowledge-based, academic tests often overlook, allowing admission professionals to see the learner beyond grades on a page. 

Open-response SJTs go a step further, offering even deeper insight than their closed-response counterparts.

Read on to learn:

• Why SJT are gaining momentum in admissions
• What makes SJTs valuable for institutions taking a more comprehensive approach to evaluating applicants
• How open- and closed-response SJT formats differ, and why those differences matter.
• How Acuity Insights’ Casper can help programs predict the future success of applicants
  

What Are Situational Judgment Tests (SJTs)?

SJTs present applicants with realistic scenarios that mirror dilemmas or challenges they may encounter in the real world. Unlike traditional academic assessments, SJTs are designed to measure non-technical skills, such as:

• Empathy
• Communication
• Teamwork
• Ethical reasoning
• Problem solving
  

These non-technical attributes are essential for success in professions like medicine, law, education, engineering, and business. SJTs help admissions committees evaluate how candidates are likely to behave in real-world, high-stakes situations, providing a more comprehensive view of an applicant’s program readiness and future success.

Why Are Situational Judgment Tests Gaining Popularity in Admissions?

As more institutions adopt a more comprehensive admissions framework, SJTs offer a research-backed way to assess professional competencies beyond grades and other test scores. This aligns with competency-based education frameworks like CanMEDS (Canada) and the ACGME Core Competencies (United States), which emphasize the importance of social intelligence and professional judgment.

Comprehensive review processes value well-rounded applicants who demonstrate both academic potential and professional attributes. SJTs fill a critical gap in traditional admissions toolkits, offering deeper insights into how applicants might interact with peers, patients, or clients.

How Do SJTs Compare to Other Admissions Tools?

Taking a look at both their strengths and limitations, here are just a handful of the ways that SJTs compare to other types of admissions tools:

Tool	Strengths	Limitations
GPA/Test Scores	Predict academic success	Do not measure non-technical skills
Reference Letters	Provide contextual feedback	Often biased or inconsistent
Personal Statements	Showcase motivation	Difficult to validate; prone to coaching or AI usage.
Interviews/Multiple Mini Interviews (MMIs)	Assess non-technical skills in real time	Time-consuming; rater bias; resource intensive. not used in early admissions
SJTs	Scalable, valid for non-technical skills assessment	Format dependent (see the next section for a deeper dive)

As you can see, SJTs stand out for their scalability, fairness, and validity, particularly when designed and scored rigorously.

Open vs. Closed Response SJTs: Why Format Matters

Now that we’ve explored how SJTs stack up against other admissions tools, let’s take a closer look at why format matters when it comes to open vs. closed response SJTs.

Closed Response SJTs

Closed response SJTs present multiple-choice or ranking-based options for each scenario. They are easy to administer and score at scale, but come with certain drawbacks:

• Can be guessed or gamed (e.g., a test taker chooses the answer they think assessors want to hear, rather than the one they would be inclined to select)
• Offer limited insight into reasoning due to fixed, unchanged options
• Vulnerable to AI tools, like ChatGPT
  

Open Response SJTs

Open response SJTs, such as Casper, allow candidates to write or speak their own responses. This format offers richer data on:

• Ethical reasoning
• Depth of thought
• Communication style
• Value alignment

Although open-response SJTs may require more resources to evaluate than closed-response formats, they are less susceptible to manipulation and provide greater validity and authenticity in high-stakes admissions contexts.

Choosing the Right SJT Format for Your Admissions Goals

For programs committed to comprehensive admissions, open response SJTs offer unmatched value. Through structured scoring processes involving trained raters and robust quality controls, tools like Casper, which assess social intelligence and professionalism, ensure fairness while capturing the nuances of human judgment.

SJTs as a Cornerstone of Modern Admissions

As higher education evolves toward more comprehensive admissions practices, situational judgment tests will play an increasingly vital role. Open response formats, in particular, empower institutions to make more informed decisions by evaluating attributes essential to professional success.

Discover how Casper helps institutions capture a more comprehensive view of applicants.