International Validation of an Employee Collusion Avoidance Scale to Deter Organized Crime

Jones, John W.; Dages, Kelly D.; Dreschler, Brian W.

doi:10.1037/e569142014-001

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the assessment included an unscored 6‐item Collusion Avoidance scale that served as an external measure that validity could be examined against . The Collusion Avoidance scale measures the extent to which an applicant is likely to succumb to temptations or pressure to participate in criminal acts organized by external individuals (Jones, Dreschler, Dages, & Cunningham, ; Jones, Dages, & Dreschler, ). Finally, the lower‐level assessment included five unscored self‐report supervisory criterion items measuring: (a) resisting the temptation to participate in theft or other negative activities at work; (b) following rules and regulations aimed at creating a safe, drug‐free workplace; (c) resisting pressure to assist people who might be engaging in theft or counterproductivity at work; (d) taking responsibility for successfully completing work tasks on time; and (e) job safety and accident prevention behaviors.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Avoidance scale measures the extent to which an applicant is likely to succumb to temptations or pressure to participate in criminal acts organized by external individuals (Jones, Dreschler, Dages, & Cunningham, 2013;Jones, Dages, & Dreschler, 2014). Finally, the lower-level assessment included five unscored self-report supervisory criterion items measuring: 2 (a) resisting the temptation to participate in theft or other negative activities at work; (b) following rules and regulations aimed at creating a safe, drug-free workplace;…”

Section: Lower-level Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cross‐cultural validity of integrity assessments for lower‐level and higher‐level jobs

Billings

Dages

2018

Int J Selection Assessment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research brief examines the cross‐cultural validity of two multi‐dimensional integrity assessments, one for lower‐level jobs and one for higher‐level jobs. Job applicants for a global company completed the assessments as a part of the hiring process in three countries: the United States, South Africa, and Mexico. U.S. applicants tended to score higher (i.e., higher integrity) on these assessments and make fewer admissions of counterproductive work behaviors than applicants from South Africa and Mexico. The overall scores for these assessments (and most of the individual scales) were correlated significantly with, for each country separately and globally, three composites of self‐reported counterproductive work behavior criterion measures (Theft, Counterproductivity, and Overall Risky Behavior). Construct validity evidence was examined with a measure of Collusion Avoidance (tolerance for colluding with external organized criminals). Overall, the results of this research highlight the importance of including an integrity assessment in the hiring processes for lower‐level and higher‐level (i.e., professional and managerial) jobs globally. Integrity assessments appear to have practical value in countries with higher prevalence of crime and corruption. The results also bolster previous research indicating that integrity assessments are valid outside of the U.S. context in which they were initially developed over 60 years ago.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Lower-level Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%