I created this site to be fully accessible for people with disabilities; please follow this link to change text size, color, or contrast ; please follow this link for other accessibility functions for those with visual, mobility, and other disabilities. I've gathered 10 of the most common fallacies and pitfalls that plague psychological testing and assessment, and provided a brief definition and discussion of each.
Scott Temby So, if this article is to be believed, how are companies able to use them in any evaluative capacity as part of a criteria for hiring, without the legal challenge of them being discriminatory and unrelated to the skills necessary to perform the job?
I think many of us would like to see citations for the research either supporting or refuting the linkage to job success that is referenced in the article.
There are over 80, occupationally-related assessments, mostly personality. Within that universe of options, there are clearly huge differences in quality and effectiveness.
However, to sweep the whole category into the dustbin, hints at somewhat less than thorough research on the subject.
In fact, the connection between hard-wired personality traits and job performance is so well established that it scarcely warrants a raised eyebrow in the educated business world.
For a more objective review of the assessment world, visit http: The fountain of youth, celebrity, perfect children, immortality etc. If you alter H2O with anything, from the environment or directly you change the nature, behavior and integrity of the water. The same can be said with employees.
The top tested, historical, evidence based salesperson in one organization can be a bum in another. Make employment like everything else, a day-to-day experience. Select based on impression and discard based on results. We select our food that way, if looks good we eat it but if it tastes bad we spit it out.
If we are bad at picking out good food very quickly become under-nourished and die. The more reliance we put on the tools, the more validation we can put towards the inadequacy of the one or organization who uses those tools. Richard Araujo Trying to measure personality has nothing to do with whether or not a person will succeed in a job so much as it is whether or not they will succeed in a certain environment populated with certain people.
Personality has little to no bearing on the job, it has everything to do with who a person works with and where. And while I agree every situation is fluid and those variables may change, not addressing them is probably a worse bet than at least attempting.
It forces hiring managers to look at a candidate through a somewhat objectively defined framework instead of focusing on the one aspect of a candidate they either love or hate, and making a hire or no hire decision respectively with not enough consideration given to the whole candidate.
So I use the tests, and accept the fact that my job as a recruiter is to try and stop bad decisions as much as direct people toward good ones.
I have also encountered aversion to skills testing specifically because they are more objective. Skills tests will always encounter resistance for those reasons.
They require you adequately define the work that needs to be done so you can test correctly. They force accountability, which is why there is an aversion to them.
For many jobs, personality plays a role in determining job performance and success in that role. Personality assessments may not be effective for roles in which the situational variables on the job do not allow for the expression of behavior related to personality, however, for many jobs this is not the case.
To say that skills and personality are not linked is perhaps a correct assertion depending upon the skill of coursehowever, it is asserted that job performance is wholly accounted for based upon skills which is untrue. Skills certainly factor into job performance, but they remain only a part of the picture of job performance.
As Lauretta pointed out, sweeping personality inventories under the rug is perhaps unfair and will hurt the predictive power of a strong hiring process that incorporates tools such as these.
Incremental predictability should be the goal of a robust hiring process and personality tests can and often do account for significant variance over and above other selection methods.A 4-Q assessment is one where the results classify you as some combination of four different options labeled as letters, numbers, colors, animals, etc.
Personality tests are most effective. According to the text, accidental mistakes in judging personality are considered _____, whereas inaccurate judgments that are motivated by prejudices are considered _____. errors, Biases One concern with items on measures like the MMPI is that they often lack face validity.
Highly Accurate Personality Test Learn What People Think of You Our eerily accurate scientifically developed personality test will provide a complete breakdown of your personality . May 12, · Although this is the most common argument against personality tests, it is actually unfounded.
First, when tests are adequately designed, it is not easy to guess what different questions assess, or how different answers will be interpreted, making deliberate manipulation quite ineffective.
tests, people are better at "faking" their answers to a personality test to score higher on desirable traits. 3 For example, people tend to score higher on conscientiousness. Personality test Comparing and Contrasting the MMPI and the Rorschach Inkblot TechniqueControversy surrounds the validity of certain personality tests, including the Rorschach Inkblot Test.
Pundits argue that the Rorschach test.