Convergent and predictive validity of the big five factors assessed with singlestimulus and quasi-ipsative questionnaires

Referencias bibliográficas

• Adair, C. (2014). Interventions for addressing faking on personality assessments for employee selection: A meta-analysis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). DePaul University, Chicago, IL.
• Aguinis, H., Henle, C. A., & Ostroff, C. (2001). Measurement in work and organizational psychology. In N. Anderson, D. Z. Ones, H. K. Sinagil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology (pp. 27-50). Sage Publications.
• Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x
• Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9(1-2), 9-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00160
• Bartram, D. (2005). The Great Eight competencies: A criterion-centric approach to validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1185-1203. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1185
• Bartram, D. (2007). Increasing validity with forced-choice criterion measurement formats. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15(3), 263-272. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00386.x
• Benet-Martínez, V., & John, O. P. (1998). Los “cinco grandes” across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 729-750. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.729
• Berry, C. M., Ones, D. S., & Sackett, P. R. (2007). Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance, and their common correlates: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 410-424. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.410
• Birkeland, S. A., Manson, T. M., Kisamore, J. L., Brannick, M. T., & Smith, M. A. (2006). A meta-analytic investigation of job applicant faking on personality measures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14(4), 317-335. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00354.x
• Borman, W. C., Penner, L. A., Allen, T. D., & Motowidlo, S. J. (2001). Personality predictors of citizenship performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9(1-2), 52-69. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00163
• Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2013). How IRT can solve problems of ipsative data in forced-choice questionnaires. Psychological Methods, 18(1), 36-52. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030641
• Cao, M., & Drasgow, F. (2019). Does forcing reduce faking? A meta-analytic review of forced-choice personality measures in high-stakes situations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(11), 1347-1368. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000414
• Caprara, G. V., & Perugini, M. (1994). Personality described by adjectives: The generalizability of the Big Five to the Italian lexical context. European Journal of Personality, 8(5), 357-369. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2410080502
• Christiansen, N. D., Burns, G. N., & Montgomery, G. E. (2005). Reconsidering forced-choice item formats for applicant personality assessment. Human Performance, 18(3), 267-307. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1803_4
• Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic Press.
• Collins, J. M., Schmidt, F. L., Sanchez-Ku, M., Thomas, L., & McDaniel, M. (1999). Predicting assessment center ratings from cognitive ability and personality. Paper presented at the 14th Annual Conference of the SIOP, Atlanta, Georgia, April 29-May 2.
• Collins, J. M., Schmidt, F. L., Sanchez–Ku, M., Thomas, L., McDaniel, M. A., & Le, H. (2003). Can basic individual differences shed light on the construct meaning of assessment center evaluations? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11(1), 17-29. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00223
• Connolly, J. J., Kavanagh, E. J., & Viswesvaran, C. (2007). The convergent validity between self and observer ratings of personality: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15(1), 110-117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00371.x
• Converse, P. D., Oswald, F. L., Imus, A., Hedricks, C., Roy, R., & Butera, H. (2006). Forcing choices in personality measurement. In R. L. Griffith, & M. H. Peterson (Eds.), A closer examination of applicant faking behavior (pp. 263-282). Information Age.
• Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Neo personality inventory-revised (NEO-PI-R) and neo five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
• Cuadrado, D., Salgado, J., & Moscoso, S. (2020). Counterproductive academic behaviors and academic performance: A meta-analysis and structural equation model. Manuscript submitted for publication.
• DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 880-896. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.880
• Digman, J. M., & Takemoto-Chock, N. K. (1981). Factors in the natural language of personality: Re-analysis and comparison of six major studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 16(2), 149-170. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr1602_2
• Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2014). Exploratory item factor analysis: Additional considerations. Anales de Psicología, 30(3), 1170-1175. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.199991
• Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative” description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1216-1229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1216
• Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26-42. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26
• Hicks, L. E. (1970). Some properties of ipsative, normative, and forced-choice normative measures. Psychological Bulletin, 74(3), 167-184. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029780
• Horn, J. L. (1971). Motivation and dynamic calculus concepts from multivariate experiment. In R. B. Cattell (Ed.), Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology (2nd printing, pp. 611-641). Tand McNally.
• Hough, L. M. (1992). The Big Five personality variables-construct confusion: Description versus prediction. Human Performance, 5(1-2), 139-155. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.1992.9667929
• Hunter, J. E., & Hunter, R. F. (1984). Validity and utility of alternative predictors of job performance. Psychological Bulletin, 96(1), 72-98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.96.1.72
• Hurtz, G. M., & Donovan, J. J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 869-879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.869
• Jackson, D. N., Wroblewski, V. R., & Ashton, M. C. (2000). The impact of faking on employment tests: Does forced choice offer a solution? Human Performance, 13(4), 371-388. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327043HUP1304_3
• Joubert, T., Inceoglu, I., Bartram, D., Dowdeswell, K., & Lin, Y. (2015). A comparison of the psychometric properties of the forced choice and Likert scale versions of a personality instrument. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 23(1), 92-97. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12098
• Judge, T. A., Jackson, C. L., Shaw, J. C., Scott, B. A., & Rich, B. L. (2007). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: the integral role of individual differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 107-127. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.107
• Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. H., & Ones, D. S. (2001). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the graduate record examinations: Implications for graduate student selection and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 162-181. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.162
• Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 148-161. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.148
• Lee, P., Lee, S., & Stark, S. (2018). Examining validity evidence for multidimensional forced choice measures with different scoring approaches. Personality and Individual Differences, 123, 229-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.11.031
• Lim, B. C., & Ployhart, R. E. (2006). Assessing the convergent and discriminant validity of Goldberg’s International Personality Item Pool: A multitrait-multimethod examination. Organizational Research Methods, 9(1), 29-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105283193
• Lloret-Segura, S., Ferreres-Traver, A., Hernández-Baeza, A., & Tomás-Marco, I. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: una guía práctica, revisada y actualizada. Anales de Psicología, 30(3), 1151-1169. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361
• Martínez, A. (2019). Evaluación empírica de un modelo teórico de los efectos del “faking” sobre las medidas de personalidad ocupacional [Empirical assessment of a theoretical model of the effects of faking on the scores of occupational personality] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
• Morillo, D., Abad, F. J., Kreitchmann, R. S., Leenen, I., Hontangas, P., & Ponsoda, V. (2019). The journey from Likert to forced-choice questionnaires: Evidence of the invariance of item parameters. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 35(2), 75-83. https://doi.org/10.5093/jwop2019a11
• Mount, M. K., & Barrick, M. R. (1995). The Big Five personality dimensions: Implications for research and practice in human resources management. In K. M. Rowland, & G. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 13, pp.153-200). JAI Press.
• Murphy, K. R. (2005). Why don’t measures of broad dimensions of personality perform better as predictors of job performance? Human Performance, 18(4), 343-357. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1804_2
• Nguyen, N. T., & McDaniel, M. A. (2000, December). Brain size and intelligence: A meta-analysis. Paper presented at the 1ª Annual Conference of the International Society of Intelligence Research, Cleveland, OH.
• Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(6), 574-583.
• Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Dilchert, S. (2005). Cognitive ability in personnel selection decisions. In A. Evers, O. Voskuijl, & N. Anderson (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of selection (pp. 143-173). Blackwell.
• Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 775-802. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01781.x
• Peabody, D., & Goldberg, L. R. (1989). Some determinants of factor structures from personality-trait descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(3), 552-567. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.3.552
• Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135(2), 322-338. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014996
• Poropat, A. E. (2014). A meta-analysis of adult-rated child personality and academic performance in primary education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(2), 239-252. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12019
• Postlethwaite, B. E. (2011). Fluid ability, crystallized ability, and performance across multiple domains: A meta-analysis (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Iowa, Iowa. https://doi.org/10.17077/etd.zopi8wvs
• Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 353-387. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026838
• Rosse, J. G., Stecher, M. D., Miller, J. L, & Levin, R. A. (1998). The impact of response distortion on preemployment personality testing and hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4), 634-644. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.4.634
• Salgado, J. F. (1997). The Five Factor Model of personality and job performance in the European Community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 30-43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.1.30
• Salgado, J. F. (1998a). Big Five personality dimensions and job performance in army and civil occupations: A European perspective. Human Performance, 11(2-3), 271-288. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.1998.9668034
• Salgado, J. F. (1998b). Manual técnico del inventario de personalidad de cinco factores (IP/5F) [Manual of the Five Factors of Personality Inventory IP/5F]. Santiago de Compostela, Spain: Tórculo.
• Salgado, J. F. (2002). The Big Five personality dimensions and counterproductive behaviors. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10(1-2), 117-125. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00198
• Salgado, J. F. (2003). Predicting job performance using FFM and non-FFM personality measures. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76(3), 323-346. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317903769647201
• Salgado, J. F. (2004, April). Moderator effects of job complexity on the Big Five validity. Poster presented at the 19th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago, IL.
• Salgado, J. F. (2010). Escalas de desempeño académico: CDTE, CDCE y CDAN [Academic performance scales: CDTE, CDCE, and CDAN] (Unpublished manuscript). Department of Social and Basic Psychology and Methodology, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
• Salgado, J. F. (2014). Reliability, construct, and criterion validity of the Quasi-Ipsative Personality Inventory (QI5F/Tri). (Unpublish manuscript.) University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
• Salgado, J. F. (2016). A theoretical model of psychometric effects of faking on assessment procedures: Empirical findings and implications for personality at work. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 24(3), 209-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12142
• Salgado, J. F. (2017). Moderator effects of job complexity on the validity of forced-choice personality inventories for predicting job performance. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 33(3), 229-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpto.2017.07.001
• Salgado, J. F., Anderson, N., & Táuriz, G. (2015). The validity of ipsative and quasi-ipsative forced-choice personality inventories for different occupational groups: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88(4), 797-834. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12098
• Salgado, J. F., & Lado, M. (2018). Faking resistance of a quasi-ipsative forced-choice personality inventory without algebraic dependence. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 34(3), 213-216. https://doi.org/10.5093/jwop2018a23
• Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S. (2019). The validity of general mental ability for five performance criteria: Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2227. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02227
• Salgado, J. F., Moscoso, S., & Anderson, N. (2013). Personality and counterproductive work behavior. In N. D. Christiansen & R. P. Tett (Eds.), Handbook of personality at work (pp. 606-632). Routledge.
• Salgado, J. F., Moscoso, S., & Lado, M. (2003). Evidence of cross-cultural invariance of the big five personality dimensions in work settings. European Journal of Personality, 17(51), 67-76. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.482
• Salgado, J. F., & Táuriz, G. (2014). The Five-Factor Model, forced-choice personality inventories and performance: A comprehensive meta-analysis of academic and occupational validity studies. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(1), 3-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2012.716198
• Salgado, J. F., Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (2001). Predictors used for personnel selection: An overview of constructs, methods and techniques. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology. Vol. 1. Personnel psychology (p. 165-199). Sage Publications Ltd.
• Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (1998). What is beyond the Big Five? Journal of Personality, 66(4), 495-524. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00022
• Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (2002). Assessing the Big Five: Applications of 10 psychometric criteria to the development of marker scales. In B. de Raad & M. Perugini (Eds.), Big Five assessment (pp. 30-54). Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
• Scarpello, V. G., Ledvinka, J., & Bergmann, T. J. (1995). Human Resource Management. South-Western College Publishing.
• Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Sage.
• Scholz, G., & Schuler, H. (1993). Das nomologische Netzwerk des Assessment Centers: Eine Metaanalyse, [The nomological network of the assessment center: A meta-analysis]. Zeitschrift für Arbeits-und Organisationspsychologie, 37(2), 73-85.
• Trapmann, S., Hell, B., Hirn, J. O. W., & Schuler, H. (2007). Meta-analysis of the relationship between the Big Five and academic success at university. Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology 215(2), 132-151. https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.215.2.132
• Vasilopoulos, N. L., Cucina, J. M., Dyomina, N. V., Morewitz, C. L., & Reilly, R. R. (2006). Forced-choice personality tests: A measure of personality and cognitive ability? Human Performance, 19(3), 175-199. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1903_1
• Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (1999). Meta-analyses of fakability estimates: Implications for personality measurement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59(2), 197-210. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131649921969802
• Viswesvaran, C., Ones, D. S., & Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 557-574. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.5.557
• Wonderlic (1992). Wonderlic Personnel Test & Scholastic Level Exam. User’s manual. Wonderlic, Inc.