ARE WE GETTING FOOLED AGAIN? COMING TO TERMS WITH LIMITATIONS IN THE USE OF PERSONALITY TESTS FOR PERSONNEL SELECTION

By F. Morgeson, M. Campion, R. L. Dipboye, J. Hollenbeck, Kevin J. Murphy, Neal Schmitt. 2007

290 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0fc297c288263c1a4d0e1e1119668563274d242e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Citations in the corpus

3 Staffing Twenty‐first‐century Organizations (2008, background): “New predictors have been proposed over time, including a resurgence in measures of personality traits, but they do not make substantial improvements in our ability to predict performance (Morgeson et al, 2007a , b ).”
The bright and dark sides of leader traits: A review and theoretical extension of the leader trait paradigm (2009, background): “” Morgeson et al. (2007) went even further, arguing, among other things, that multiple”
The Contributions of Personality to Organizational Behavior and Psychology: Findings, Criticisms, and Future Research Directions (2008, background): “Judging from ongoing debates (see Morgeson et al., 2007a,b; Ones, Dilchert, Viswesvaran, & Judge, 2007; Tett & Christiansen, 2007), answers to four questions are required to evaluate this potential problem: (1) Can personality inventories be faked?”
Investigating the Uniqueness and Usefulness of Proactive Personality in Organizational Research: A Meta-Analytic Review (2015, methodology): “…the incremental validity of proactive personality over the Big Five personality traits and GMA is certainly a step in the right direction (Morgeson et al., 2007), but it is not sufficient, at least in light of the legal requirements and social norms of equal opportunity that…”
The Person–Situation Debate Revisited: Effect of Situation Strength and Trait Activation on the Validity of the Big Five Personality Traits in Predicting Job Performance (2014, background): “As for the latter, while some have questioned the practical relevance of personality variables for human resource selection decisions (Morgeson et al., 2007a, 2007b; Murphy & Dzieweczynski, 2005), our results show that, when there is reason to believe that the trait is relevant to the job context,…”
The Five-Factor Model, forced-choice personality inventories and performance: A comprehensive meta-analysis of academic and occupational validity studies (2014, background): “…a panel of past and current editors of the top-tier journals in industrial, work, and organizational psychology discussed the evidence on various aspects of the validity of personality inventories for personnel selection and concluded with a rather pessimistic view (Morgeson et al., 2007a, 2007b).”
BEYOND PERSONALITY TRAITS: A STUDY OF PERSONALITY STATES AND SITUATIONAL CONTINGENCIES IN CUSTOMER SERVICE JOBS (2011, background): “…(Barrick & Mount, 1991; Hurtz & Donovan, 2000), the size of meta-analytic estimates of the criterion-related validity of personality measures has led some to question the usefulness of personality measures in personnel decision making (e.g., Morgeson et al., 2007; Murphy & Dzieweczynski, 2005).”
The relation between emotional intelligence and job performance: A meta‐analysis (2011, background): “However, the breadth of FFM measures introduces a sizable amount of variation (Morgeson et al., 2007) which likely attenuates this percentage.”