The Experts below are selected from a list of 30555 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Richard D Goffin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • give us your social networking site passwords implications for Personnel Selection and personality
    Personality and Individual Differences, 2015
    Co-Authors: Travis J Schneider, Richard D Goffin, Kabir N Daljeet
    Abstract:

    Abstract Recently, employers have begun asking applicants for their social networking site (SNS) password to access private information that could be job-relevant. However, the effect that this request can have on an organization’s Selection process and its Selection of individual applicant traits has not been previously examined. Findings from the current study of 892 employed or previously-employed participants suggested that 57.87% of the sample would refuse the password request, thereby removing themselves from the applicant pool. Such a large reduction in the applicant pool could necessitate a drastic decrease in cutoff scores on subsequent pre-employment tests, which would lower workforce productivity and Personnel Selection utility. In addition, the SNS password request caused adverse impact for several minority groups, and affected the personality scores of the remaining applicant pool.

  • the use of personality measures in Personnel Selection what does current research support
    Human Resource Management Review, 2006
    Co-Authors: Mitchell G Rothstein, Richard D Goffin
    Abstract:

    With an eye toward research and practice, this article reviews and evaluates main trends that have contributed to the increasing use of personality assessment in Personnel Selection. Research on the ability of personality to predict job performance is covered, including the Five Factor Model of personality versus narrow personality measures, meta-analyses of personality–criterion relationships, moderator effects, mediator effects, and incremental validity of personality over other Selection testing methods. Personality and team performance is also covered. Main trends in contemporary research on the extent to which applicant “faking” of personality tests poses a serious threat are explicated, as are promising approaches for contending with applicant faking such as the “faking warning” and the forced-choice method of personality assessment. Finally, internet-based assessment of personality and computer adaptive personality testing are synopsized.

  • a position statement by the international graphonomics society on the use of graphology in Personnel Selection testing
    International Journal of Testing, 2003
    Co-Authors: Marvin L Simner, Richard D Goffin
    Abstract:

    Among the various tests employed in Personnel Selection, handwriting analysis, or graphology, has enjoyed long-standing international popularity despite being highly contentious. This report contains not only an evaluation of the current published scientific reviews on the use of graphology in Personnel Selection, but also an evaluation of several additional studies graphologists provided that seemed to have been overlooked. The latter were obtained by contacting nine of the foremost institutes offering graphological training, consulting services, or both to ensure that the graphologists themselves would be fairly represented. Even with this additional information we found no reason to counter conclusions the scientific community has reached, namely that (a) the continued use of graphology in Personnel Selection could prove harmful to many individuals and firms, and (b) it fails to approach the level of criterion validity of other widely available and less expensive screening devices used for Personnel se...

  • using personality testing for Personnel Selection faking and test taking inductions
    International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 1995
    Co-Authors: Richard D Goffin, Debra M Woods
    Abstract:

    This research assessed whether warning subjects that faked responses could be detected would reduce the amount of faking that might occur when using a personality test for Selection of police officers. Also, personality test subscales which best differentiated honest from dissimulated responses were determined. Subjects (N=120) were randomly assigned to a straight-take (that is, respond honestly), fake good, or modified fake good group. Both fake good groups were instructed to respond to the test so as to appear favourably for the job; additionally, the modified fake good group was warned that faking could be detected and could reduce hiring chances. Multivariate analyses revealed significant differences on the Denial and Deviation subscales between the three conditions (p <0.01). The pattern of differences suggested that the threat of faking detection reduced faking. Potential application of these findings in Personnel Selection was discussed.

Filip Lievens - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Michael A Campion - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • using practice employment tests to improve recruitment and Personnel Selection outcomes for organizations and job seekers
    Journal of Applied Psychology, 2019
    Co-Authors: Michael C Campion, Emily D Campion, Michael A Campion
    Abstract:

    This study introduces the use of practice employment tests during recruitment as a tool with the potential to improve outcomes for both an organization and its (potential) applicants during Personnel Selection. Synthesizing research on recruitment, Selection, job search, adverse impact, signaling theory, and human capital theory, we propose that practice tests reduce information asymmetry regarding the nature of an organization's assessment procedures, thereby acting as short-term human capital investment opportunities. Using a large sample of potential applicants and applicants who later decided to apply for jobs within a professional occupation in a large organization, we demonstrate that (a) those who took the practice tests scored higher on the actual tests; (b) score gains between practice tests and actual tests were greater for Blacks and Hispanics when compared to Whites; (c) the practice test exhibited a self-Selection effect, encouraging those with higher scores to apply; and (d) score gains between practice tests and actual tests were similar to scores observed for those retesting on the actual tests. These findings suggest practice tests may be capable of simultaneously enhancing organizational outcomes (e.g., increased quality of applicants, reduced cost of testing unqualified applicants, and reduced adverse impact) and applicant outcomes (e.g., increased human capital, increased chances of eventual employment, and reduced disappointment and wasted effort from unsuccessful application). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

  • initial investigation into computer scoring of candidate essays for Personnel Selection
    Journal of Applied Psychology, 2016
    Co-Authors: Michael C Campion, Michael A Campion, Emily D Campion, Matthew H Reider
    Abstract:

    [Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 101(7) of Journal of Applied Psychology (see record 2016-32115-001). In the article the affiliations for Emily D. Campion and Matthew H. Reider were originally incorrect. All versions of this article have been corrected.] Emerging advancements including the exponentially growing availability of computer-collected data and increasingly sophisticated statistical software have led to a "Big Data Movement" wherein organizations have begun attempting to use large-scale data analysis to improve their effectiveness. Yet, little is known regarding how organizations can leverage these advancements to develop more effective Personnel Selection procedures, especially when the data are unstructured (text-based). Drawing on literature on natural language processing, we critically examine the possibility of leveraging advances in text mining and predictive modeling computer software programs as a surrogate for human raters in a Selection context. We explain how to "train" a computer program to emulate a human rater when scoring accomplishment records. We then examine the reliability of the computer's scores, provide preliminary evidence of their construct validity, demonstrate that this practice does not produce scores that disadvantage minority groups, illustrate the positive financial impact of adopting this practice in an organization (N ∼ 46,000 candidates), and discuss implementation issues. Finally, we discuss the potential implications of using computer scoring to address the adverse impact-validity dilemma. We suggest that it may provide a cost-effective means of using predictors that have comparable validity but have previously been too expensive for large-scale screening. (PsycINFO Database Record

  • are we getting fooled again coming to terms with limitations in the use of personality tests for Personnel Selection
    Personnel Psychology, 2007
    Co-Authors: Frederick P Morgeson, Michael A Campion, Robert L Dipboye, Kevin R Murphy, John R Hollenbeck, Neal Schmitt
    Abstract:

    We recently published an article in which we highlighted a number of issues associated with the use of self-report personality tests in Personnel Selection contexts (Morgeson et al., 2007). Both Ones, Dilchert, Viswesvaran, and Judge (2007) and Tett and Christiansen (2007) have written responses to this article. In our response to these articles we address many of the issues raised by Ones et al. and Tett and Christiansen. In addition to a detailed response, we make the following 4 key points: (1) Our criticisms of personality testing apply only to the Selection context, not to all research on personality; (2) the observed validities of personality tests predicting job performance criteria are low and have not changed much over time; (3) when evaluating the usefulness of using personality tests to select applicants, one must not ignore the observed, uncorrected validity; and (4) when discussing the value of personality tests for Selection contexts, the most important criteria are those that reflect job performance. Implications for personality testing research and practice are discussed.

  • reconsidering the use of personality tests in Personnel Selection contexts
    Personnel Psychology, 2007
    Co-Authors: Frederick P Morgeson, Michael A Campion, Robert L Dipboye, Kevin R Murphy, John R Hollenbeck, Neal Schmitt
    Abstract:

    Although long thought to be unrelated to job performance, research in the early 1990s provided evidence that personality can predict job performance. Accompanying this research was a resurgence of interest in the use of personality tests in high-stakes Selection environments. Yet there are numerous potential problems associated with the current operational use of personality. As such, 5 former journal editors from Personnel Psychology and the Journal of Applied Psychology (2 primary outlets for such research), who have collectively reviewed over 7,000 manuscripts and who have no vested interest in personality testing, reconsider the research on the use of personality tests in environments where important Selection decisions are made. Their comments are based on a panel discussion held at the 2004 SIOP conference. Collectively, they come to several conclusions. First, faking on self-report personality tests cannot be avoided and perhaps is not the issue; the issue is the very low validity of personality tests for predicting job performance. Second, as such, using published self-report personality tests in Selection contexts should be reconsidered. Third, personality constructs may have value for employee Selection, but future research should focus on finding alternatives to self-report personality measures.

Paul R Sackett - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Personnel Selection a longstanding story of impact at the individual firm and societal level
    European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2021
    Co-Authors: Filip Lievens, Paul R Sackett, Charlene Zhang
    Abstract:

    This paper discusses how and why the field of Personnel Selection has made a long-lasting mark in work and organizational psychology. We start by outlining the importance and relevance of the well-...

  • new developments in the use of measures of honesty integrity conscientiousness dependability trustworthiness and reliability for Personnel Selection
    Personnel Psychology, 1996
    Co-Authors: Paul R Sackett, James E Wanek
    Abstract:

    This paper is the fourth in a series of reviews of the use of measures of honesty, integrity, conscientiousness, dependability, trustworthiness, and reliability for Personnel Selection (see Sackett & Decker, 1979; Sackett & Harris, 1984; Sackett, Burris, & Callahan, 1989). New developments reviewed include an examination of professional and congressional inquiry into this area of testing, rapid growth of the validity data base, new insight into similarities and differences between different tests, and links to the Big Five personality dimensions. Inquiries into relationships with other constructs, including cognitive ability, moral reasoning, and social desirability are reviewed, as are applicant reactions to these tests. The effects of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 and the Americans with Disabilities Act are considered.

  • integrity testing for Personnel Selection
    Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1994
    Co-Authors: Paul R Sackett
    Abstract:

    Psychological Association, Questionnaires Used in the Prediction of Trustworthiness in Pre-Employ ment Selection Decisions: An APA Task Force Re port (Author, Washington, DC, 1991); R.M. O'Ban non, L.A. Goldinger, and G.S. Appleby, Honesty and Integrity Testing: A Practical Guide (Applied In formation Resources, Atlanta, 1989). 5. D.S. Ones, C. Viswesvaran, and F.L. Schmidt, Comprehensive meta-analysis of integrity test validities: Findings and implications for person nel Selection and theories of job performance, jour nal of Applied Psychology, 78, 679-703 (1993); J.M. Collins and F.L. Schmidt, Personality, integrity, and white collar crime: A construct validity study, Personnel Psychology, 46, 295-312 (1993). 6. Sackett et al., note 4; J. Hogan and R. Hogan, How to measure employee reliability, Jour nal of Applied Psychology, 74, 273-279 (1989). 7. Sackett et al., note 4; O'Bannon et al., note 4. 8. See U.S. Congress (1990), note 1; American Psychological Association, note 4. 9. U.S. Congress (1990), note 1, p. 10. 10. See Saxe, note 3; H. Sigall and E.E. Jones, The bogus pipeline: A new paradigm for measuring affect and attitude, Psychological Bulletin, 76, 349 364(1971). 11. D.T. Lykken, The lie detector controversy: An alternative solution, in Advances in Psychophys iology, j.R. Jennings, P.K. Ackles, and M.G.H. Coles, Eds. (Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London, 1991). 12. L. Farwell and E. Donchin, The truth will out: Interrogative polygraph ("lie detection") with even-related potentials, Psychophysiology, 28, 531 (1991).

Neal Schmitt - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • are we getting fooled again coming to terms with limitations in the use of personality tests for Personnel Selection
    Personnel Psychology, 2007
    Co-Authors: Frederick P Morgeson, Michael A Campion, Robert L Dipboye, Kevin R Murphy, John R Hollenbeck, Neal Schmitt
    Abstract:

    We recently published an article in which we highlighted a number of issues associated with the use of self-report personality tests in Personnel Selection contexts (Morgeson et al., 2007). Both Ones, Dilchert, Viswesvaran, and Judge (2007) and Tett and Christiansen (2007) have written responses to this article. In our response to these articles we address many of the issues raised by Ones et al. and Tett and Christiansen. In addition to a detailed response, we make the following 4 key points: (1) Our criticisms of personality testing apply only to the Selection context, not to all research on personality; (2) the observed validities of personality tests predicting job performance criteria are low and have not changed much over time; (3) when evaluating the usefulness of using personality tests to select applicants, one must not ignore the observed, uncorrected validity; and (4) when discussing the value of personality tests for Selection contexts, the most important criteria are those that reflect job performance. Implications for personality testing research and practice are discussed.

  • reconsidering the use of personality tests in Personnel Selection contexts
    Personnel Psychology, 2007
    Co-Authors: Frederick P Morgeson, Michael A Campion, Robert L Dipboye, Kevin R Murphy, John R Hollenbeck, Neal Schmitt
    Abstract:

    Although long thought to be unrelated to job performance, research in the early 1990s provided evidence that personality can predict job performance. Accompanying this research was a resurgence of interest in the use of personality tests in high-stakes Selection environments. Yet there are numerous potential problems associated with the current operational use of personality. As such, 5 former journal editors from Personnel Psychology and the Journal of Applied Psychology (2 primary outlets for such research), who have collectively reviewed over 7,000 manuscripts and who have no vested interest in personality testing, reconsider the research on the use of personality tests in environments where important Selection decisions are made. Their comments are based on a panel discussion held at the 2004 SIOP conference. Collectively, they come to several conclusions. First, faking on self-report personality tests cannot be avoided and perhaps is not the issue; the issue is the very low validity of personality tests for predicting job performance. Second, as such, using published self-report personality tests in Selection contexts should be reconsidered. Third, personality constructs may have value for employee Selection, but future research should focus on finding alternatives to self-report personality measures.