Lessons Learned in Transitioning Personality Measures From Research to Operational Settings

White, Leonard A.; Young, Mark C.; Hunter, Arwen E.; Rumsey, Michael G.

doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2008.00049.x

Cited by 28 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Human resource managers and those responsible for designing selection tools may find value in including measures that capture these personality traits. Given the concern that self‐report personality measures may be vulnerable to faking (White, Young, Hunter, & Rumsey, ), additional mechanisms throughout the interview process should be implemented to capture these specific personality traits. Though structured interviews often include personality elements, namely, the Big Five (Levashina, Hartwell, Morgeson, & Campion, ), our results indicate that organizations interested in fostering psychological safety should focus on designing interview questions that capture proactive personality and learning orientation as well.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological Safety: A Meta‐Analytic Review and Extension

Frazier

Fainshmidt

Klinger

et al. 2016

Personnel Psychology

570

553

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although psychological safety research has flourished in recent years, and despite the empirical support for the important role of psychological safety in the workplace, several critical questions remain. In order to address these questions, we aggregate theoretical and empirical works, and draw on 136 independent samples representing over 22,000 individuals and nearly 5,000 groups, to conduct a comprehensive meta‐analysis on the antecedents and outcomes of psychological safety. We not only present the nomological network of psychological safety but also extend this research in 4 important ways. First, we compare effect sizes to determine the relative effectiveness of antecedents to psychological safety. Second, we examine the extent to which psychological safety influences both task performance and organizational citizenship behaviors over and beyond related concepts such as positive leader relations and work engagement. Third, we examine whether research design characteristics and national culture alter validities within the nomological network, thus promoting a more accurate and contextualized understanding of psychological safety. Finally, we test the homology assumption by comparing the effect sizes of the antecedents and outcomes of psychological safety across individual and group levels of analysis. We conclude with a discussion of the areas in need of future examination.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological Safety: A Meta‐Analytic Review and Extension

Frazier

Fainshmidt

Klinger

et al. 2016

Personnel Psychology

570

553

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the context of 360 degree performance ratings using SS scales, for example, Yammarino (2003) concluded that "the construct validity of multisource ratings and feedback is faulty or at least highly suspect" (p. 9; see also Brown, Inceoglu, & Lin, 2017). In high stakes settings, some have found that "faking good" may render SS rating scale scores suspect (Donovan, Dwight, & Schneider, 2014) or even virtually useless (Sisson, 1948;White, Young, Hunter, & Rumsey, 2008). SS measures in the judgement and decision making literature have also been criticized (Por & Budescu, 2017) due to their wellknown biases (e.g., Tversky & Kahneman, 1974).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Though Forced, Still Valid: Psychometric Equivalence of Forced-Choice and Single-Statement Measures

Zhang

Sun

Drasgow

et al. 2019

Organizational Research Methods

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forced choice (FC) measures are gaining popularity as an alternative assessment format to single statement (SS) measures due to their potential in reducing the impact of various response styles and faking. However, a fundamental question remains to be answered: do FC and SS instruments measure the same underlying constructs? In addition, FC measures are theorized to be more cognitively challenging, so how would this feature influence respondents' reactions to FC measures compared to SS? Two studies were designed to answer these questions. Study 1 results showed that FC measures scored by the Multi-unidimensional Pairwise Preference Model (MUPP) and SS measures scored with an ideal point model yielded similar factor structures and almost identical criterion-related validity across 12 criteria. Both formats also had similar pattern of marginal reliabilities and test-retest reliabilities. Study 1 findings were replicated in Study 2.In addition, we found strong evidence for convergent validity between the two formats. Though the FC format was perceived to be more difficult, respondents showed no differential preference and expressed similar level of emotional and cognitive reactions to the two formats.

show abstract

“…The impetus for this research is that applicants score higher on personality scales than do incumbents, and these differences lead to questions about the validity of these scales. Some research has shown that response distortion does not affect predictive validity (e.g., Hogan, Hogan, & Roberts, 1996;Ones et al, 1996), although some authors argue that faking may lead to weaker predictive validity estimates (e.g., Rosse, Stecher, Miller, & Levin, 1998;White, Young, Hunter & Rumsey, 2008). The result of these scale score differences can lead to organizations making hiring decisions that are not in line with organizational goals.…”

Section: Modeling Applicants' and Incumbents' Item Responsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Applicants and Incumbents Respond to Personality Items Similarly? A Comparison of Dominance and Ideal Point Response Models

O’Brien

2011

International Journal of Selection and Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study used an ideal point response model to examine the extent to which applicants and incumbents differ when responding to personality items. It was hypothesized that applicants' responses would exhibit less folding at high trait levels than incumbents' responses. We used sample data from applicants (N ¼ 1,509) and incumbents (N ¼ 1,568) who completed the 16 Personality Questionnaire Select. Differential item (DIF) and test functioning (DTF) analyses were conducted using the generalized graded unfolding model, which is based on ideal point model assumptions. Out of the 90 items, 50 showed DIF; however, only 11 were in the hypothesized direction. DTF was significant for 3 of the 12 scales; 2 were in the hypothesized direction.

show abstract

Lessons Learned in Transitioning Personality Measures From Research to Operational Settings

Cited by 28 publications

References 3 publications

Psychological Safety: A Meta‐Analytic Review and Extension

Psychological Safety: A Meta‐Analytic Review and Extension

Though Forced, Still Valid: Psychometric Equivalence of Forced-Choice and Single-Statement Measures

Do Applicants and Incumbents Respond to Personality Items Similarly? A Comparison of Dominance and Ideal Point Response Models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About