Untitled

Abstract

Using generalizability theory, a partial reanalysis and reinterpretation of the Schmit et al. (1995) data was conducted with undergraduate students who were asked to respond to both noncontextualized and work-specific versions of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1989) either honestly (N = 100) or as if they were applying for a job (N = 100). Results indicated that the person variance was larger in the applicant compared to the general instructions condition, that the person × situation interaction accounted for significant variance across all scales included in the study (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness), that these person × situation effects were attenuated in the applicant instructions condition as compared to the general instructions condition, and that responses to the Neuroticism scale were most affected by this interaction. Implications for the use of personality constructs in personnel selection include a shift from concerns of "faking" to a conWe thank Beth Manke for her thoughtful comments.

Evaluating Risk Propensity Using an Objective Instrument

“…4. The evaluation's objective should be masked to the fullest extent possible; this avoids distorted responses, both voluntary (Robie, Born, & Schmit, 2001) and involuntary, which are common in personality evaluation (Seiwald, 2002). 5.…”