We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)
References
Aguinis, H., Mazurkiewicz, M. D., & Heggestad, E. D. (2009). Using web-based frame-of-reference training to decrease biases in personality-based job analysis: An experimental field study. Personnel Psychology, 62(2), 405–438. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2009.01144.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, N. T., Dalal, D. K., Boyce, A. S., O’Connell, M. S., Kung, M.-C., & Delgado, K. M. (2014). Uncovering curvilinear relationships between conscientiousness and job performance: How theoretically appropriate measurement makes an empirical difference. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(4), 564–586. doi: 10.1037/a0034688CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carter, N. T., Dalal, D., Guan, L., Lopilato, A. C., & Withrow, S. A. (2017). Item response theory scoring and the detection of curvilinear relationships. Psychological Methods, 22(1), 191–203.Google ScholarPubMed
Cascio, W. F., & Aguinis, H. (2011). Applied psychology in human resource management (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S., Drasgow, F., & Roberts, B. W. (2007). Constructing personality scales under the assumptions of an ideal point response process: Toward increasing the flexibility of personality measures. Psychological Assessment, 19(1), 88–106. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.19.1.88CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dilchert, S., Ones, D. S., & Krueger, R. F. (2014). Maladaptive personality constructs, measures, and work behaviors. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7(1), 98–110. doi: 10.1111/iops.12115Google Scholar
Emre, M. (2018). The personality brokers: The strong history of Myers-Briggs and the birth of personality testing. New York, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Grant, A. M. (2013). Rethinking the extraverted sales ideal: The ambivert advantage. Psychological Science, 24(6), 1024–1030. doi: 10.1177/0956797612463706CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hogan, R. (2007). Personality and the fate of organizations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
Huffcutt, A. I., Conway, J. M., Roth, P. L., & Stone, N. J. (2001). Identification and meta-analytic assessment of psychological constructs measured in employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 897–913.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le, H., Oh, I.-S., Robbins, S. B., Ilies, R., Holland, E., & Westrick, P. (2011). Too much of a good thing: Curvilinear relationships between personality traits and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1), 113–133. doi: 10.1037/a0021016CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, C. I. S. G., & Steel, P. (n.d.). The potential of good selection: Simulating the impact of improved applicant matching on GDP. Currently under review.Google Scholar
Melson-Silimon, A., Harris, A. M., Shoenfelt, E. L., Miller, J. D., & Carter, N. (2019). Personality testing and the Americans with Disabilities Act: Cause for concern as normal and abnormal personality models are integrated. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 12(2), 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickel, L. B., Roberts, B. W., & Chernyshenko, O. S. (2019). No evidence of a curvilinear relation between conscientiousness and relationship, work, and health outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(2), 296–312. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000176CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oh, I.-S., Kim, S., & Van Iddekinge, C. H. (2015). Taking it to another level: Do personality-based human capital resources matter to firm performance?Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(3), 935–947. doi: 10.1037/a0039052CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Neill, T. A., Goffin, R. D., & Rothstein, M. (2013). Personality and the need for personality-oriented work analysis. In Christiansen, N. D. & Tett, R. T. (Eds.), Handbook of personality at work (pp. 226–252). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Paulhus, D. L., Westlake, B. G., Calvez, S. S., & Harms, P. D. (2013). Self-presentation style in job interviews: The role of personality and culture. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(10), 2042–2059. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peck, J. A., & Levashina, J. (2017). Impression management and interview and job performance ratings: A meta-analysis of research design with tactics in mind. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 201. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00201Google ScholarPubMed
Raymark, P. H., Schmit, M. J., & Guion, R. M. (1997). Identifying potentially useful personality constructs for employee selection. Personnel Psychology, 50(3), 723–736. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00712.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, T., Samuel, D. B., Pahlen, S., & Krueger, R. F. (2015). DSM-5 alternative personality disorder model traits as maladaptive extreme variants of the five-factor model: An item-response theory analysis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 124, 343–354. doi: 10.1037/abn0000035CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wu, J., & Lebreton, J. M. (2011). Reconsidering the dispositional basis of counterproductive work behavior: The role of aberrant personality. Personnel Psychology, 64(3), 593–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zickar, M. J., & Kostek, J. A. (2013). History of personality testing within organizations. In Christiansen, N. D. & Tett, R. P. (Eds.), Handbook of personality at work (pp. 165–182). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar