Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Faking Is As Faking Does: A Rejoinder To Marcus (2021), Robert P. Tett, Daniel Simonet, Neil D. Christiansen
Faking Is As Faking Does: A Rejoinder To Marcus (2021), Robert P. Tett, Daniel Simonet, Neil D. Christiansen
Personnel Assessment and Decisions
Applicant faking poses serious threats to achieving personality-based fit, negatively affecting both the worker and the organization. In articulating this “faking-is-bad” (FIB) position, Tett and Simonet (2021) identify Marcus’ (2009) self-presentation theory (SPT) as representative of the contrarian “faking-is-good” camp by its advancement of self-presentation as beneficial in hiring contexts. In this rejoinder, we address 20 of Marcus’ (2021) claims in highlighting his reliance on an outdated empiricist rendering of validity, loosely justified rejection of the negative and moralistic “faking” label, disregard for the many challenges posed by blatant forms of faking, inattention to faking research supporting the FIB position, …
Applicant Faking On Personality Tests: Good Or Bad And Why Should We Care?, Robert P. Tett, Daniel V. Simonet
Applicant Faking On Personality Tests: Good Or Bad And Why Should We Care?, Robert P. Tett, Daniel V. Simonet
Personnel Assessment and Decisions
The unitarian understanding of construct validity holds that deliberate response distortion in completing self-report personality tests (i.e., faking) threatens trait-based inferences drawn from test scores. This “faking-is-bad” (FIB) perspective is being challenged by an emerging “faking-is-good” (FIG) position that condones or favors faking and its underlying attributes (e.g., social skill, ATIC) to the degree they contribute to predictor–criterion correlations and are job relevant. Based on the unitarian model of validity and relevant empirical evidence, we argue the FIG perspective is psychometrically flawed and counterproductive to personality-based selection targeting trait-based fit. Carrying forward both positions leads to variously dark futures for …
Situational Judgment Tests: An Overview Of Development Practices And Psychometric Characteristics, Deborah L. Whetzel, Taylor S. Sullivan, Rodney A. Mccloy
Situational Judgment Tests: An Overview Of Development Practices And Psychometric Characteristics, Deborah L. Whetzel, Taylor S. Sullivan, Rodney A. Mccloy
Personnel Assessment and Decisions
Situational judgment tests (SJTs) are popular assessment methods often used for personnel selection and promotion. SJTs present problem scenarios to examinees, who then evaluate each response option for addressing the issue described in the scenario. As guidance for practitioners and researchers alike, this paper provides experience- and evidence-based best practices for developing SJTs: writing scenarios and response options, creating response instructions, and selecting a response format. This review describes scoring options, including key stretching and within-person standardization. The authors also describe research on psychometric issues that affect SJTs, including reliability, validity, group differences, presentation modes, faking, and coaching.