Aslı GÖNCÜ

Personality Measurement and Faking: An Integrative Framework

Kişilik testi yapmak, kurumsal ortamlardaki seçme kararlarında yaygın olarak uygulanan popüler bir yöntemdir. Ancak, özellikle açık olan, başka bir deyişle örtük olmayan kişilik ölçümlerinin yanıltmacılık ve tepki değiştirme gibi davranışların olumsuz etkilerine açık olabildiğini savunan bazı araştırmacılara göre, tartışlmalı bir yöntemdir. Bu çalışmanın birinci amacı, Morgeson, Morgeson, Campion, Dipboye, Hollenbeck, Murphy ve Schmitt’in yanıltmacılık ve tepki değiştirmeye yönelik bulgulara dayanarak, performans değerlendirmede kişilik ölçümlerinin sınırlılıklarını tartıfltıkları makalelerini özetlemektir. İkinci amaç, Rosse, Stecher, Miller and Levin’in seçme kararlarında kişilik testlerinin yanıltılmasının etkilerini araştırdığı çalışmaları ayrıntılı olarak tartışmaktadır. Son olarak, örtük kişilik ölçümleri, kişilik araştırmalarında tepki değiştirmenin etkilerine yönelik çıkarımların örnekleri ve gelecekte yapılacak olan araştırmalara yönelik önermelerle birlikte tanıtmak hedeflenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

seçme, kişilik testi, yanıltmacılık, örtük kişilik ölçümleri

Personality Measurement and Faking: An Integrative Framework

Personality testing is a popular method that used to be commonly employed in selection decisions in organizational settings. However, it is also a controversial practice according to a number researcher who claims that especially explicit measures of personality may be prone to the negative effects of faking and response distortion. The first aim of the present paper is to summarize Morgeson, Morgeson, Campion, Dipboye, Hollenbeck, Murphy and Schmitt’s paper that discussed the limitations of personality testing for performance ratings in relation to its basic conclusions about faking and response distortion. Secondly, the results of Rosse, Stecher, Miller and Levin’s study that investigated the effects of faking in personality testing on selection decisions will be discussed in detail. Finally, recent research findings related to implicit personality measures will be introduced along with the examples of the results related to the implications of those measures for response distortion in personality research and the suggestions for future research.

Keywords:

personality testing, selection, faking, implicit personality measures,

PDF

___

Asendorpf, Jens B., Banse, Rainer, and Mücke, Daniel, “Double Dissociation between Implicit and Explicit Personality Self-Concept: The Case of Shy Behavior,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83 (2002), pp.380-393. Costa, Paul and McCrae, Robert R., Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) Professional Manual, (Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, 1992). Frost, Brian C., Ko, Chia-Huei E. and James, Lawrence R., “Implicit and Explicit Personality: A Test of Channeling Hypothesis for Aggressive Behavior,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 92/5 (2007), pp.1299-1319. Greenwald, Anthony G., McGhee, Debbie E. and Schwartz, Jordan L. K., “Measuring Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition: The Implicit Association Test,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (1998), pp.1464-1480. Hogan, Joyce, Barrett, Paul and Hogan, Robert, “Personality Measurement, Faking and Employment Selection,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 92/5 (2007), pp.1270-1285. James, Lawrence R., “Measurement of Personality via Conditional Reasoning,” Organizational Research Methods, 1 (1998), pp.131-163. LeBreton, James M., Barksdale, Cheryl D., Robin, Jennifer and James, Lawrence R., “Measurement Issues Associated with Conditional Reasoning Tests: Indirect Measurement and Test Faking,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 92/1 (2007), pp.1-16. McDaniel, Max J., Beier, Margaret E., Perkins, Andrew W., Goggin, Stephen and Frankel, Brian, “An Assessment of the Fakeability of Self-Report and Implicit Personality,” Journal of Research in Personality, 43/4 (2009), pp.682-685. Morgeson, Frederick P., Campion, Michael A., Dipboye, Rorbert L., Hollenbeck, John R., Murphy, Kevin and Schmitt, Neal, “Are We Getting Fooled Again? Coming to Terms with Limitations in the Use of Personality Tests for Personnel Selection,” Personnel Psychology, 60/4 (2007), pp.1029-1049. Ones, Deniz S., Dilchert, Stephan, Viswesvaran, Chockalingam and Judge, Timothy A., “In Support of Assessment of Personality in Organizational Settings,” Personnel Psychology, 60 (2007), pp.995-1027. Paulhus, Delroy L., Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR) Reference Manual for Version 6, (Manual available from author at Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B. C., Canada, V6T IY7, 1991). Rosse, Joseph G., Stecher, Mary D., Miller, Janice L. and Levin, Robert A., “The Impact of Response Distortion on Pre-Employment Personality Testing and Hiring Decisions,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 83 (1998), pp.634-644. Schnabel, Konrad, Banse, Rainer and Asendorpf, Jens, “Employing Automatic Approach and Avoidance Tendencies for the Assessment of Implicit Personality Self-Concept: The Implicit Association Procedure (IAP),” Experimental Psychology, 53/1 (2006), pp.69-76. Siers, Brian P. and Christiansen, Neil D., “On the Validity of Implicit Association Measures of Personality Traits,” Personality and Individual Differences, 54/3 (2013), pp.361-366. Tett, Robert P. and Christiansen, Neil D., “Personality Tests at the Crossroads: A Response to Morgeson, Campion, Dipboye, Hollenbeck, Murphy and Schmitt,” Personnel Psychology, 60 (2007), pp.967-993.