Personality Tests and Employee Selection

447
in review
Assessing Personality
PERSONALIT Y TESTS
Type of Test
Characteristics
Advantages
Disadvantages
Objective
Paper-and-pencil format;
quantitatively scored
Efficiency, standardization
Subject to deliberate
distortion
Projective
Ambiguous stimuli create
maximum freedom of
response; scoring is
relatively subjective
“Correct” answers not
obvious; designed to tap
unconscious impulses;
flexible use
Reliability and validity lower
than those of objective
tests
?
1. Projective personality tests are based on the
approach to personality.
2. The NEO-PI-R and the MMPI-2 are examples of
tests.
3. Most personality researchers use
tests in their work.
Nonetheless, most researchers agree that projective personality tests, especially the
Rorschach, are substantially less reliable and valid than objective tests (Garb et al.,
2005). In fact, because of their generally poor ability to predict behavior, they often add
little information about people beyond what might be inferred from interviews or other
sources (Hunsley, Lee, & Wood, 2003). “In Review: Personality Tests” summarizes the
characteristics of objective and projective personality tests, along with some of their
advantages and disadvantages.
Personality Tests and Employee Selection
How good are objective personality tests at selecting people for jobs? Most industrial/organizational psychologists believe that they are valuable tools for the selection
of good employees. Tests such as the MMPI (and even some projective tests) are sometimes used to help guide hiring decisions, but large organizations usually choose objective tests that are designed to measure the big-five personality dimensions or related
characteristics (Borman et al., 1997; Costa, 2001). Several researchers have found significant relationships between scores on the big-five dimensions and measures of job
performance and effective leadership (Kieffer, Schinka, & Curtiss, 2004; Lim & Ployhart,
2004; Silverthorne, 2001). A more general review of studies involving thousands of people has shown that objective personality tests are of value in helping businesses reduce
theft, absenteeism, and other disruptive employee behaviors (Ones & Viswesvaran, 2001;
Ones, Viswesvaran, & Schmidt, 2003).
Still, personality tests are far from perfect predictors of workplace behavior. Many
tests measure traits that may be too general to predict specific aspects of job performance (Furnham, 2001). In fact, features of the work situation are often better predictors of employee behavior than are personality tests (Mumford et al., 2001). Further,
some employees see personality tests as an invasion of their privacy. They worry that
test results in their personnel files might later be misinterpreted and hurt their chances
for promotion or for employment by other companies. Lawsuits have resulted in a ban
on the use of personality tests in the selection of U.S. federal employees. Concerns
about privacy and other issues surrounding personality testing have also led the American Psychological Association and related organizations to publish joint ethical standards relating to procedures for the development, distribution, and use of all psychological tests (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological
Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education, 1999; American Psychological Association, 2002b). The goal is not only to improve the reliability and validity of tests but also to ensure that their results are properly used and do not infringe
on individuals’ rights (Turner et al., 2001).