No abstract

A comprehensive meta-analysis of two types of forced-choice (FC) personality inventories (ipsative and quasi-ipsative) across nine occupational groups (Clerical, Customer Service, Health Care, Managerial, Military, Police, Sales, Skilled Manual, and Supervisory) is reported. Quasi-ipsative measures showed substantially higher operational validity coefficients and validity generalization across all occupations than ipsative measures. Results also showed that, compared with the findings of previous meta-analyses, quasi-ipsative personality inventories are better predictors of job performance than previously thought and that operational validities for ipsative measures are notably congruent with past findings. We conclude that quasi-ipsative scale formats are superior for predicting job performance for all occupational groups. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings for personnel selection are discussed in Conclusion. Practitioner pointsPersonality inventories have been widely used in personnel selection, but it was thought that their predictive validity was small. We found that they are substantially more valid than was previously thought. The traditional opinion among researchers in I/O psychology is that single-stimulus personality inventories (e.g., normative Likert-type scales) have superior predictive validity to FC personality questionnaires (e.g., ipsative inventories), but our research findings suggest that this is not true for quasi-ipsative inventories. In comparison with ipsative and normative personality inventories, quasi-ipsative personality inventories showed higher predictive validity regardless of occupational group. Based on our results, we recommend the use of quasi-ipsative FC personality measures in personnel selection decisions regardless of the occupation group being recruited for.Several meta-analyses conducted over the last 20 years have shown that the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality predicts a wide range of performance outcomes, including job performance, training proficiency, counterproductive behaviours, accidents, job satisfaction, leadership, and innovative behaviours in the workplace (Barrick & Mount, 1991;Bartram, 2005;Clarke & Robertson, 2005;Feist, 1998;Hough, 1992 Anderson, & Salgado, 2009;Hurtz & Donovan, 2000;Judge & Bono, 2001;Judge, Rodell, Klinger, Simon, & Crawford, 2013;Salgado, 1997Salgado, , 2002Salgado, , 2003Tett, Rothstein, & Jackson, 1991). Research has also demonstrated that the FFM is a robust framework for grouping the large variety of personality measures developed within the various theoretical approaches (Barrick & Mount, 1991;Hough, 1992;Hurtz & Donovan, 2000;Salgado, 1997;Tett et al., 1991). Across these meta-analytic efforts, conscientiousness and emotional stability were consistently found to be predictors of job performance for all occupations and that the other three personality dimensions were valid predictors for specific criteria and specific occupations (Barrick, Mount, & Judge, 2001).All the meta-analyses mentioned above were c...

Resumen. Este artículo presenta dos estudios en los que se ha examinado la fiabilidad (consistencia interna, equivalencia y estabilidad), validez de constructo y discriminación de género de las valoraciones de méritos como instrumento de selección de personal. En el primer estudio (N=72) se encontró que la valoración de méritos presentaba una fiabilidad test-retest y de acuerdo entre valoradores elevada (rxx=.93) pero una consistencia interna baja (α= .53). Igualmente, se observó evidencia de discriminación indirecta contra el grupo de mujeres. En el segundo estudio, dos muestras (N=42 y N=98) sirvieron para examinar la consistencia interna, la validez de constructo y la discriminación de género. Los resultados mostraron coeficientes alfa inferiores a los del primer estudio y mayor discriminación de género. Por último, se discuten las implicaciones de los resultados para la investigación y la aplicación de este instrumental en la selección de personal. Palabras clave: valoraciones de méritos, experiencia, formación, fiabilidad, validez, discriminación.Abstract. This article presents two studies examining reliability (internal consistency, equivalence, and stability), construct validity, and gender discrimination of merit ratings as a personnel selection procedure. The first study (N=72) found that merit rating showed a large test-retest reliability and rater's agreement (rxx=.93) but low internal consistency (α=.53). It was also observed evidence of gender discrimination against women. In the second study, two samples (N=42 and N=98) were used for estimating internal consistency, construct validity and gender discrimination. Results showed Alpha's coefficients smaller than study 1 and larger gender discrimination. Finally, the implications of this procedure for the research and practice of personnel selection are discussed.

Resumen. El falseamiento es la distorsión de las repuestas a un cuestionario por parte de los evaluados. En este artículo se examina el efecto del falseamiento, inducido en un contexto de laboratorio, sobre la validez de criterio y de constructo de un cuestionario de personalidad basado en el modelo de los Cinco Grandes Factores. Así mismo, se examina el efecto que la estrategia de advertencia, uno de los métodos que se utilizan para evitar el falseamiento, pueda tener sobre la validez del cuestionario. Los resultados indican una disminución de la capacidad predictiva del test, tanto en la condición de falseamiento, como en la de advertencia. La estructura factorial resulta, así mismo, ligeramente afectada. Las implicaciones de los resultados para la investigación y la práctica profesional son examinadas y discutidas.