problem 3 - personality Flashcards
the big 5 and job performance
several meta-analyses show that the Big 5 shows consistent but low to moderate validity regarding job performance
* conscientiousness - most consistent job perf predictor - but is still moderate at best
* emotional stability - the only other dimension that shows a significant correlation with overall job perf
* extraversion & openness - related to training performance
* agreeableness & extraversion - related to team performance
the big 5 and CWB/OCB
- all big 5 traits positively related to most measures of OCB
- conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability - negatively associated with CWB
the HEXACO model
includes the Big 5 but has added an extra dimension to it: honesty-humility
* additional dimensions can add to the prediction of job perf, particularly with regard to ethical aspects
what is the bandwith fidelity discussion?
address whether it is better to use narrow or broad traits to predict job perf
conclusion:
when one want to predict a narrow aspect of performance - it may be better to use a narrow trait
but if one uses a broad complex criterion - a broader trait as a predictor may lead to better validity
however the debate is still ongoing
what is the general factor of personality?
captures the socially desirable ends of personality measures - high GFP-individuals are relatively sociable, industrious, friendly, emotionally stable, and open to new experiences
* GFP reflects knowledge about what is considered socially desirable or effective behavior + a tendency and/or ability to act in that way = optimizing the obtainment of personal goals
lee et al (2005)
method
(HEXACO vs FFM on workplace delinquency)
paritcipants: uni students
measures:
1. HEXACO personality inventory
2. 3 diff measures of the FFM dimension
3. workplace delinquency: self-report questionnaire of delinquent behavior in the workplace
4. overt integrity test
lee et al (2005)
results & conclusion
(HEXACO vs FFM)
- results indicate that the Honesty–Humility construct was primarily responsible for the predictive superiority associated with the HEXACO model
- the FFM was less able to accommodate workplace delinquency and overt integrity test scores than the HEXACO model
- the degree to which the HEXACO model outperformed the FFM in predicting outcome variables was high enough to suggest that this finding has considerable practical sig
basically HEXACO is better
artifact vs substantive accounts of GFP
artifact account: social desirability response bias is the primary cause of the general factor = GFP can be neglected bcuz a statistical artifact is unlikely to have relevance
substantive account: predicts that the general factor is related to a broad range of real-life outcomes
van der linden et al (2014)
study 1: hypothesis & method
(GFP & personnel selection of dutch armed forces)
hypothesis: expect to find viable GFPs in the Big 5 measures & the perf motivation measures + expect that the GFPs from these two measures show substantial correlations
* main focus: the relationship between GFPs & other ratings
* expect that the candidates’ GFP scores are associated with the overall interview scores they received
method:
* 3,670 candidates who applied for entrance into military training
* NEO-PI-R: assess the big 5 traits
* PMT: measure achievement motivation, neg fear of failure & pos fear of failure
* selection interview: part of military selection procedure - assesses several person characteristics
van der linden et al (2014)
study 1: results & conclusion
(GFP & personnel selection of dutch armed forces)
general factor found in NEO-PI-R, PMT & interview
* GFPs were among the highest of the predictive validities regarding overall interview score and the general interview factor
main finding: GFPs showed meaningful relationships with the interview outcomes - specifically, candidates with higher GFP scores received more favorable ratings in the interview
van der linden et al (2014)
study 2: aim & method
(GFP & personnel selection of dutch armed forces)
study 1 indicates a relation between GFP scores and behavior during an interview, but doesn’t show whether the GFP relates to how individuals would typically behave
study 2 partly deals with this limitation by using raters who have interacted & observed participants during military training that lasted for several months
method:
applicants who were hired to enter training at military - filled out the surveys and were rated on integrity
* HEXACO - measure personality traits
* dark triad measure
* PANAS - positive & negative affect scales
* integrity ratings - rated by supervisors
van der linden et al (2014)
study 2: results & conclusion
(GFP & personnel selection of dutch armed forces)
found viable GFPs in 3 diff personality surveys - as in Study 1, the GFPs relevantly and significantly correlated with each other
main finding: each of the GFPs showed relevant associations with the integrity ratings of the supervisors
= higher scores on the GFP → better relationships with other trainees, better adherence to the rules of conduct, and higher reliability
van der linden et al (2014)
general conclusions
(GFP & personnel selection of dutch armed forces)
study 1: showed that high-GFP individuals were rated more favorably on a variety of characteristics during an interview
study 2: found high-GFP individuals to be judged as more reliable and to show more adherence to the behavioral rules that apply in military training
findings are supportive of 2 broader assumptions of GFP:
1. GFP truly reflects the tendency for socially desirable behavior instead of being mere response bias
2. high GFP scores are accompanied by a social advantage
what are the 3 traits of the dark triad?
machiavellianism: characterized by an unconventional view on morality, low empathy, and the willingness to deceive and manipulate others for one’s own gain
narcissism: a tendency for self-enhancement or an unrealistic positive view on one’s own personality or appearance
psychopathy: impulsiveness and thrill-seeking, combined with low empathy, anxiety, and a tendency toward being antagonistic
the dark triad traits in the workplace
- narcissism - correlated with unethical behavior in CEOs and a great need for power
- corporate psychopaths feel diminished levels of workplace responsibility + can adversely affect productivity
- machiavellianism - associated with less organizational, supervisor, and team commitment + tendency to be perceived as abusive & focus on maintain power
the dark triad traits are likely to provide biases towards job-choice through the manner by which each trait relates to people and power
