Personality and Job Performance: the Big Five Revisited

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 91
  • Published : April 18, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
During the several decades prior to the 1990s, the use of personality testing in employee selection was generally looked down on by personnel selection specialists. This was primarily due to pessimistic conclusions drawn by researchers such as Guion and Gottier (1965) in their qualitative review of the personality testing literature and by Schmitt, Gooding, Noe, and Kirsch (1984) in their quantitative meta-analysis of various personnel selection tech- niques. The general conclusion drawn by these researchers was that personality tests did not demonstrate adequate predictive validity to qualify their use in personnel selection. In fact, Schmitt et al. (1984) found that personality tests were among the least valid types of selection tests, with an overall mean sample-size weighted correlation of .21 for predicting job performance, and concluded that "personality tests have low validity" (p. 420). Over the past several years, however, there has been an in- creased sense of optimism regarding the utility of personality tests in personnel selection (Behling, 1998; Goldberg, 1993; Hogan, Hogan, & Roberts, 1996; Hogan & Ones, 1997; Mount & Barrick, 1995). In recent years, researchers have suggested that the true predictive validity of personality was obscured in earlier research by the lack of a common personality framework for organizing the traits being used as predictors (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Hough, 1992; Mount & Barrick, 1995; Ones, Mount, Barrick, & Hunter, 1994). With increasing confidence in the robustness of the five- factor model of personality (Digman, 1990; Goldberg, 1993; John, Gregory M. Hurtz, Department of Psychology, University at Albany, State University of New York; John J. Donovan, Department of Psychol- ogy, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. A version of this study was presented at the 13th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, Texas, April 1998. We thank Kevin Williams, Stephen...
tracking img