Personality Correlates of a Test of Honesty

Logan, Thomas; Koettel, Robert C.; Moore, Robert W.

doi:10.2466/pr0.1986.59.2.1015

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Harris (1984) reported similar patterns of correlations with the 16PF for the London House PSI and for the Reid Report. Logan, Koettel, and Moore (1986) reported correlations with the 16PF for the Phase I1 profile for a sample of college students; the profiles of correlations was quite different from that found with the London House PSI and the Reid Report (correlations between profiles of .28 and .30, respectively, whereas the London House-16PF profile and the Reid Report-l6PF profile correlated .88). Logan et al question whether the differences in profiles are the result of differences between the tests or differences in situations (e.g., applying for a job vs. anonymous participation in a research project).…”

Section: Relationshqs With Other Constructsmentioning

confidence: 71%

Integrity Testing for Personnel Selection: An Update

Sackett

Burris

Callahan

1989

Personnel Psychology

278

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sackett and M. M. Harris (1984) reviewed published and unpublished literature on the use of commercially available paper‐and‐pencil integrity tests for employee selection. This paper reviews recent developments in this area. Legal issues related to the use of the polygraph, and integrity tests are discussed. Empirical research on the reliability, criterion‐related validity, construct validity, fakability, and adverse impact of integrity tests is reviewed. Major changes since the previous review include (1) the emergence of two distinct types of tests, labeled overt integrity tests and personality‐oriented measures, (2) a broadening of the criteria used for test validation to include global performance, absence, turnover, and forms of counterproductivity other than theft, and (3) an increase in the use of external criteria (e.g., detected theft, turnover) rather than self‐report criteria (e.g., admissions of theft) in validation research. Difficulties in interpreting research findings and practical constraints on the use of integrity tests are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Relationshqs With Other Constructsmentioning

confidence: 71%

Integrity Testing for Personnel Selection: An Update

Sackett

Burris

Callahan

1989

Personnel Psychology

278

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The task was based on previously published work (26,27). On all trials, a white fixation cross appeared for 500 ms; it was replaced by an "X" or "O" "go-signal" for 1000 ms (Fig.1).…”

Section: Behavioral Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural Circuitry Engaged During Unsuccessful Motor Inhibition in Pediatric Bipolar Disorder

Leibenluft¹

2007

Am J Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dickstein, Daniel P.; Tone, Erin; and Pine, Daniel S., "Neural circuitry engaged during unsuccessful motor inhibition in pediatric bipolar disorder" (2007 Objective: Deficits in motor inhibition may contribute to impulsivity and irritability in children with bipolar disorder (BPD). Therefore, studies of the neural circuitry engaged during failed motor inhibition in pediatric BPD may contribute to our understanding of the pathophysiology of the illness. We tested the hypothesis that children with BPD and controls would differ in ventral prefrontal cortex (vPFC), striatal, and anterior cingulate activation during unsuccessful motor inhibition. We also compared activation in medicated vs.unmedicated children with BPD, and in children with BPD and ADHD (BPD+ADHD) vs.those with BPD but without ADHD (BPD-ADHD).Method: Event-related fMRI study comparing neural activation in children with BPD and controls while they performed a motor inhibition task. The sample included 26 children with BPD (13 unmedicated, 15 with ADHD) and 17 age, gender, and IQ matched controls. Results:On failed inhibitory trials, controls showed greater bilateral striatal and right vPFC activation than did patients. While our findings were somewhat more prominent in unmedicated than medicated, patients, and in BPD+ADHD than BPD-ADHD, the findings did not differ significantly (?) among these subgroups of children with BPD.

show abstract

“…Results of research with the Personnel Reaction Blank (Gough, 1971), the Employee Reliability Index (J. Hogan & R. Hogan, 1989Hogan, , 1992, and the Employment Inventory (Personnel Decisions, Inc., 1985) point to the psychological meaning of personality-based integrity measures. For example, Ones (1993) concluded that such tests reflect the Big Five theme of conscientiousness and, to a lesser degree, emotional stability and agreeableness (see also Logan, Koettel, & Moore, 1986; Murphy & Lee, 1994). However, the psychological meaning of overt integrity tests is unclear; thus, Woolley and Hakstian (1992) found that the relationship between overt and personality-based integrity measures varied.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the Gap Between Overt and Personality‐based Integrity Tests

Hogan¹,

Brinkmeyer²

1997

Personnel Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Overt and personality-based integrity tests are used for the same purposes, but the relationship between the two kinds of measures is unclear. Moreover, although the construct validity of personality-based integrity measures is well understood, the psychological meaning of overt integrity measures is unclear. A sample of applicants (N = 2,168) for driver, warehouse, and clerical jobs completed an overt integrity test (Reid Report), a personality-based integrity test (Employee Reliability Index) and a measure of normal personality (Hogan Personality Inventory). A principal components analysis of the intercorrelations between the overt and the personality-based integrity item responses revealed four themes: (a) punitive attitudes, (b) admissions of illegal drug use, (c) reliability, and (d) theft admissions. A model testing for a general conscientiousness factor provided a good fit for the overt and personality-based integrity test variables, although item overlap between the two test types was minimal. Finally, the punitive attitudes and theft admissions components of the Reid item pool are most closely related to the Big Five personality factors of conscientiousness and emotional stability; the Reid component of illegal drug use was unrelated to personality measures.Despite the fact that integrity tests are widely used for personnel selection, we actually know rather little about their psychological meaning. This study concerns three questions. First, how are overt and personality-based integrity measures related and what do they measure? Second, does a structural model specifying a single conscientiousness factor best fit the data from overt and personality-based integrity measures? Finally, what is the relationship between components of overt integrity and a Big Five measure of normal personality?Sackett and his colleagues (1984,1989) distinguish between types of pre-employment integrity tests based on their item content. Overt integrity tests ask about attitudes toward dishonest behavior, and history of theft and other illegal activities. In contrast, personality-based integrity tests assess attitudes and dispositions that are only inferentially related ~ The authorsgratefully acknowledge the contribution of Kelly Vandever who assisted in this research. We also thank Michael Cunningham, Fritz Drasgow, Thomas Hill, Robert Hogan, Brent Roberts, and several anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Joyce Hogan, Hogan Assessment Systems, PO. Box 521 176, lblsa, OK 74152.

show abstract

Personality Correlates of a Test of Honesty

Cited by 13 publications

References 4 publications

Integrity Testing for Personnel Selection: An Update

Integrity Testing for Personnel Selection: An Update

Neural Circuitry Engaged During Unsuccessful Motor Inhibition in Pediatric Bipolar Disorder

Bridging the Gap Between Overt and Personality‐based Integrity Tests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About