A matter of context: A comparison of two types of contextualized personality measures
MetadataShow full item record
The present study compared the effect of two types of Frame-of-Reference modifications to each other and to a baseline generic measure. Generic personality scales, tagged scales with 'at school', and completely modified scales were compared in their prediction of academic performance, counterproductive academic behavior, and participant reactions. To this end the HEXACO-PI-R (n = 215) and the MPT-BS (n = 316) were filled out by students in a within-subject design. Results showed a significant increase in criterion validity from generic, to tagged, to completely contextualized personality scales. Face validity and perceived predictive validity improved with increasing contextualization. The current study indicates that completely contextualizing personality items increases criterion validity more than just adding a tag to items.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Robie, C.; Risavy, S.; Holtrop, Djurre; Born, M. (2017)We compared the predictive validity of two types of Frame-of-Reference personality measures to each other and to a baseline generic measure. Each version of the measures used a unique response-format referred to as ...
Holtrop, Djurre; Born, M.; de Vries, R. (2014)A recent meta-analysis showed that contextualized personality inventories have incremental predictive validity over generic personality inventories when predicting job performance. This study aimed to investigate the ...
Hughes, Angus; Holtrop, Djurre; Dunlop, Patrick; Steedman, Grace; Chan, Joan (2019)Aim: Between 30-50% of job applicants are thought to ‘fake’ on personality measures, representing a challenge to the validity of these assessments by practitioners in the selection process (Griffith, Chmielowski, & Yoshita, ...