Measurement error in "big five factors" personality assessment: Reliability generalization across studies and measures

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Volumn 60, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 224-235

  Viswesvaran, Chockalingam ^a   Ones, Deniz S ^b  

^a FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034340618     PISSN: 00131644     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/00131640021970475     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
2. Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Strauss, J. P. (1993). Conscientiousness and performance of sales representatives: Test of the mediating effects of goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 715-722.
3. Bommer, W. H., Johnson, J. L., Rich, G. A., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1995). On the interchangeability of objective and subjective measures of employee performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 48, 587-605.
4. Borman, W. C. (1979). Format and training effects on rating accuracy and rater errors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 410-412.
5. Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. In M. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial organizational psychology (Vol. 1, 2nd ed., pp. 687-732). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
6. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 653-665.
7. Christensen, L. (1974). The influence of trait, sex, and information accuracy of personality assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 38, 130-135.
8. Guion, R. M. (1994, August). Thinking carefully about conscientiousness. Paper presented at the symposium titled Relevance of Conscientiousness to Occupational Criteria held at the 102nd annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles.
9. Guion, R. M., & Gottier, R. F. (1965). Validity of personality measures in personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 18, 135-164.
10. Hough, L. H., Eaton, N. K., Dunnette, M. D., Kamp, J. D., & McCloy, R. A. (1990). Criterion-related validities of personality constructs and the effects of response distortion on those validities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 581-595.
11. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting for error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12. Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
13. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
14. Ones, D. S. (1993). The construct validity of integrity tests. Dissertation Abstracts International, 54(09A), 3515.
15. Ones, D. S., Schmidt, F. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (1994, April). Do broader personality variables predict job performance with higher validity? Paper presented at the symposium titled Personality and Job Performance: Big Five Versus Specific Traits held at the ninth annual conference of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychologists, Nashville, TN.
16. Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. Reinhardt, B. (1996). Factors affecting coefficient alpha: A mini Monte Carlo study. In B. Thompson (Ed.), Advances in social science methodology (Vol. 4, pp. 3-20). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
18. Sackett, P. R. (1996, April). Discussant's comments. Presented at the symposium titled Integrity Testing: Recent Controversies and New Empirical Findings held at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego, CA.
19. Schmidt, F. L. (1992). What do data really mean? Research findings, meta-analysis, and cumulative knowledge in psychology. American Psychologist, 47, 1173-1181.
20. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1977). Development of a general solution to the problem of validity generalization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 529-540.
21. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1996). Measurement error in psychological research: Lessons from 26 research scenarios. Psychological Methods, 1, 199-223.
22. Thompson, B. (1992). Two and one-half decades of leadership in measurement and evaluation. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 434-438.
23. Vacha-Haase, T. (1998). Reliability generalization: Exploring variance in measurement error affecting score reliability across studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 6-20.
24. Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (1995). Theory testing: Combining psychometric meta-analysis and structural equations modeling. Personnel Psychology, 48, 865-887.
25. Viswesvaran, C., Ones, D. S., & Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Comparative analysis of the reliability of performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 557-574.
26. Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F. L., & Ones, D. S. (1994, April). Examining the validity of supervisory ratings of job performance using linear composites. Paper presented at the ninth annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Nashville, TN.
27. Wohlers, A. J., & London, M. (1989). Ratings of managerial characteristics: Evaluation difficulty, co-worker agreement, and self-awareness. Personnel Psychology, 42, 235-261.