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...