Personality Testing and Industrial–Organizational Psychology: Reflections, Progress, and Prospects

2008 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 272-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leaetta M. Hough ◽  
Frederick L. Oswald
Keyword(s):  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Organizational Psychology ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Personality Testing ◽  
Personality Tests ◽  
Organizational Research ◽  
Broad Perspective ◽  
Industrial Organizational Psychology ◽  
Multidimensional Models

As the title suggests, this article takes a broad perspective on personality as it is conceptualized and measured in organizational research, and in the spirit of this Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology journal, we framed the article as a series of 7 questions. These 7 questions deal with (1) personality and multidimensional models of performance, (2) personality taxonomies and the five-factor model, (3) the effects of situations on personality–performance relationships, (4) the incremental validity of personality over cognitive ability, (5) the need to differentiate personality constructs from personality measures, (6) the concern with faking on personality tests, and (7) the use of personality tests in attempting to address adverse impact. We dovetail these questions with our perspectives and insights in the hope that this will stimulate further discussion with our readership.

Personality testing and the Americans With Disabilities Act: Cause for concern as normal and abnormal personality models are integrated

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arturia Melson-Silimon ◽  
Alexandra M. Harris ◽  
Elizabeth L. Shoenfelt ◽  
Joshua D. Miller ◽  
Nathan T. Carter
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Americans With Disabilities Act ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ◽  
Personality Testing ◽  
Personality Measures ◽  
Clinical Neuropsychology ◽  
Personality Tests ◽  
Selection Systems

AbstractApplied psychologists commonly use personality tests in employee selection systems because of their advantages regarding incremental criterion-related validity and less adverse impact relative to cognitive ability tests. Although personality tests have seen limited legal challenges in the past, we posit that the use of personality tests might see increased challenges under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA) due to emerging evidence that normative personality and personality disorders belong to common continua. This article aims to begin a discussion and offer initial insight regarding the possible implications of this research for personality testing under the ADA. We review past case law, scholarship in employment law, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidance regarding “medical examinations,” and recent literature from various psychology disciplines—including clinical, neuropsychology, and applied personality psychology—regarding the relationship between normative personality and personality disorders. More importantly, we review suggestions proposing the five-factor model (FFM) be used to diagnose personality disorders (PDs) and recent changes in theDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM). Our review suggests that as scientific understanding of personality progresses, practitioners will need to exercise evermore caution when choosing personality measures for use in selection systems. We conclude with six recommendations for applied psychologists when developing or choosing personality measures.

The “Right Stuff”: Personality Tests and the Five-Factor Model in Landing Craft Air Cushion Crew Training

1993 ◽  
Vol 37 (13) ◽  
pp. 920-924 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Street ◽  
Kathleen T. Helton
Keyword(s):  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Characteristics ◽  
Personality Testing ◽  
Personality Factor ◽  
Selection System ◽  
Factor Scores ◽  
Air Cushion ◽  
Training Success ◽  
Selection Of

The purpose of our investigation was to determine if personality testing and a five-factor model could improve the selection of Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) vehicle operators. Vehicle operators for the LCAC are currently selected on the basis of their performance on a computer-based psychomotor selection system. The various psychomotor tests in the selection system have demonstrated predictive validity in LCAC crew training. Certain personality characteristics may also be involved in the LCAC vehicle operator training success. In fact, various researchers have found that personality testing may improve the selection of Navy/Marine Corps aviators. There is increasing evidence that a five-factor model may be useful in describing the personality characteristics involved in training success. We believe that a five-factor model may improve the selection system used for LCAC vehicle operators. A principal component analysis with varimax rotation was conducted to determine the underlying structure of the Adult Personality Inventory (API) with 168 LCAC crew candidates. The resulting factor scores were then entered into a series of hierarchical multiple regression analyses to determine the relation of the personality factor scores and the performance-based test to an underway grade in training criterion. The results indicated that one personality factor, openness, significantly improved predictions of the criterion ( p < 0.05). Based on these results, we believe that personality testing may improve the selection of LCAC vehicle operators.

Incremental validity of the Structured Interview for the Five‐Factor Model of Personality (SIFFM)

2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 343-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie D. Stepp ◽  
Timothy J. Trull ◽  
Rachel M. Burr ◽  
Mimi Wolfenstein ◽  
Angela Z. Vieth
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Histrionic Personality Disorder

This study examined the incremental validity of the Structured Interview for the Five‐Factor Model (SIFFM; Trull & Widiger, 1997) scores in the prediction of borderline, antisocial, and histrionic personality disorder symptoms above and beyond variance accounted for by scores from the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP; Clark, 1993), a self‐report questionnaire that includes items relevant to both normal (i.e. Big Three) and abnormal personality traits. Approximately 200 participants (52 clinical outpatients, and 149 nonclinical individuals from a borderline‐features‐enriched sample) completed the SIFFM, the SNAP, and select sections of the Personality Disorder Interview—IV (PDI‐IV; Widiger, Mangine, Corbitt, Ellis, & Thomas, 1995). We found support for the incremental validity of SIFFM scores, further indicating the clinical utility of this instrument. However, results also supported the incremental validity of SNAP scores in many cases. We discuss the implications of the findings in terms of dimensional approaches to personality disorder assessment. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The validity of FFM personality dimensions and maladaptive traits to predict negative affects at work: a six month prospective study in a military sample

2003 ◽  
Vol 17 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. S101-S121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean‐Pierre Rolland ◽  
Filip De Fruyt
Keyword(s):  
Negative Affect ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Military Personnel ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Factor Space ◽  
Axis Ii ◽  
Negative Affects ◽  
Negative Predictor

The present work explores what the domain of maladaptive traits has to offer to the industrial and organizational (I/O) field investigating the incremental validity of maladaptive traits from DSM Axis II to predict negative emotions experienced at work, beyond Five‐Factor Model dimensions. This study was designed to examine the validity of adaptive and maladaptive traits to predict four negative affects (Anger, Fear, Sadness, and Shame) experienced at work in military personnel. The design was longitudinal, including two measurement moments, i.e. prior to and immediately after returning from a peace mission in a foreign country. The four negative affects were largely stable across a six month interval. FFM dimensions substantially explained negative affects experienced six months later, although the variance accounted for varied strongly across affects. In line with previous research, emotional stability was a consistent negative predictor of negative affects at both measurement moments. Two maladaptive traits derived from DSM Axis II (i.e. Borderline and Avoidant) were consistently related to specific negative affects experienced at work. Finally, maladaptive traits did not predict negative affect variance beyond FFM traits. These results are in line with robust findings suggesting that maladaptive trait patterns could be integrated in the five‐factor space, and as a consequence have little or no incremental utility over FFM dimensions. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

scholarly journals Assessment of Fluctuation Between Grandiose and Vulnerable Narcissism: Development and Initial Validation of the FLUX Scales

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua R. Oltmanns ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger
Keyword(s):  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Pathological Narcissism ◽  
Vulnerable Narcissism ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Affective Lability ◽  
Pathological Narcissism Inventory ◽  
Item Scale

There is a growing interest in the distinction between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, along with a hypothesis of a fluctuation between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism within individuals. There are several well-validated measures of both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, but research has generally found that they are relatively distinct in their relations with their nomological networks. Further, the existing measures of narcissism do not actually assess for a possible fluctuation. The present study developed three scales of narcissistic fluctuation: Fluctuation between Indifference and Anger, Grandiosity and Shame, and Assertiveness and Insecurity. Consistent with expectations, the FLUX scales correlated with both grandiose and vulnerable narcissism, displayed convergent and discriminant validity with factor derived-narcissism scales and the five-factor model, and correlated at moderate-to-large effect sizes with measures of affective lability. The three FLUX scales were also reduced to one unidimensional nine-item scale of narcissistic fluctuation (the g-FLUX) that retained the correlational properties for the more specific scales and had incremental validity over the Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory and Pathological Narcissism Inventory grandiose and vulnerable scales in accounting for affective lability. Results from the present study suggest that the FLUX scales may provide an informative assessment of a fluctuation between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism.

The Diversity Management for Employment of the Persons With Disabilities

2021 ◽  
pp. 1445-1468
Author(s):  
Kai Seino ◽  
Aoi Nomoto ◽  
Tomohiro Takezawa ◽  
Heike Boeltzig-Brown
Keyword(s):  
Vocational Rehabilitation ◽  
Diversity Management ◽  
Organizational Psychology ◽  
Broad Perspective ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Employment Supports ◽  
Industrial Organizational Psychology

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the latest knowledge of effective diversity management—from businesses and academia—with regard to the employment of persons with disabilities. From a broad perspective, this knowledge is found in the field of industrial-organizational psychology. From a more narrow perspective, and based on evidence from a substantial study, the knowledge of vocational rehabilitation has relevance for persons with disabilities. Vocational rehabilitation is the practice of providing employment supports that will build win-win relationships between employers and persons with disabilities. This chapter reviews recent findings documenting the effective employment and management of persons with disabilities, and summarizes effective actions and workplace considerations for the employment of persons with disabilities.

Hardiness Scales in Iranian Managers: Evidence of Incremental Validity in Relationships with the Five Factor Model and with Organizational and Psychological Adjustment

2005 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 775-781 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nima Ghorbani ◽  
P. J. Watson
Keyword(s):  
Job Satisfaction ◽  
Work Environment ◽  
Psychological Adjustment ◽  
Perceived Stress ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Openness To Experience ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
External Control

This study examined the incremental validity of Hardiness scales in a sample of Iranian managers. Along with measures of the Five Factor Model and of Organizational and Psychological Adjustment, Hardiness scales were administered to 159 male managers ( M age = 39.9, SD = 7.5) who had worked in their organizations for 7.9 yr. ( SD = 5.4). Hardiness predicted greater Job Satisfaction, higher Organization-based Self-esteem, and perceptions of the work environment as being less stressful and constraining. Hardiness also correlated positively with Assertiveness, Emotional Stability, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness and negatively with Depression, Anxiety, Perceived Stress, Chance External Control, and a Powerful Others External Control. Evidence of incremental validity was obtained when the Hardiness scales supplemented the Five Factor Model in predicting organizational and psychological adjustment. These data documented the incremental validity of the Hardiness scales in a non-Western sample and thus confirmed once again that Hardiness has a relevance that extends beyond the culture in which it was developed.

Comparing the Triarchic and Five-Factor Trait Models: Relations With Psychopathy and Other Clinical Criteria in an Incarcerated Offender Sample

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 792-817 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah J. Brislin ◽  
Peter Cernohorsky ◽  
Christopher J. Patrick ◽  
Laura E. Drislane ◽  
Maria Caruso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Personality Dimensions ◽  
Clinical Criteria ◽  
Male Offenders ◽  
Self Harm ◽  
Psychopathic Tendencies ◽  
Triarchic Model

This study compared how normative personality dimensions of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) and neurobehavioral traits of the triarchic model relate to psychopathic tendencies and clinical outcomes in an incarcerated sample of 277 Italian male offenders. Associations between triarchic model traits, measured using the TriPM and the FFM dimensions, measured using the NEO-FFI, were consistent with prior studies. Scores on the TriPM, particularly the Disinhibition scale, were associated with substance abuse and self-harm behavior over and above the presence of psychopathy, and beyond the personality dimensions indexed by the NEO-FFI. By contrast, the Neuroticism and Extraversion scales showed incremental validity, over and above psychopathy and TriPM scores, in predicting depressive tendencies. Lastly, both NEO-FFI and TriPM scales contributed to prediction of staff ratings of behavior in prison and prognosis for release, above and beyond psychopathy. These findings highlight potential advantages of the FFM and triarchic trait models for predicting clinical outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document