Differential item functioning by sex and race in the hogan personality inventory

Assessment

Volumn 13, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 442-453

  Sheppard, Richard ^a   Han, Kyunghee ^a   Colarelli, Stephen M ^a   Dai, Guangdong ^a   King, Daniel W ^b  

^a CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Differential item functioning; Employee selection; Hogan Personality Inventory; Item bias; Measurement bias; Personality testing

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AFRICAN AMERICAN; ARTICLE; CAR; CAUCASIAN; EMPLOYMENT; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INDUSTRY; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONALITY TEST; PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SAMPLE SIZE; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; STANDARD; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; AFRICAN AMERICANS; AUTOMOBILES; EMPLOYMENT; EUROPEAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; FEMALE; HUMANS; INDUSTRY; MALE; MICHIGAN; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONALITY INVENTORY; PERSONNEL SELECTION; PREJUDICE; PSYCHOMETRICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 33750151570     PISSN: 10731911     EISSN: 15523489     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1073191106289031     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Arbisi, P. A., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & McNulty, J. (2002). A comparison of MMPI-2 validity in African American and Caucasian psychiatric inpatients. Psychological Assessment, 14, 3-15.
2. Azocar, F., Arean, P., Miranda, J., & Munoz, R. F. (2001). Differential item functioning in a Spanish translation of the Beck Depression Inventory. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57, 355-365.
3. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
4. Bobko, P., & Bartlett, C. (1978). Subgroup validities: Differential definitions and differential prediction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 12-14.
5. Butcher, J. N., Dahlstrom, W. G., Graham, J. R., Tellegen, A., & Kaemmer, B. (1989). Manual for the restandardized Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: MMPI-2. An administrative and interpretive guide. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
6. Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. (2000). Genes, peoples, and languages. Berkeley: University of California Press.
7. Chen, C., Burton, M., Greenberger, E., & Dmitrieva, J. (1999). Population migration and the variation of dopamine D4 receptor (DRD4) allele frequencies around the globe. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 309-324.
8. Cleary, T. A. (1968). Test bias: Prediction of grades of Negro and White students in integrated colleges. Journal of Educational Measurement, 5, 115-124.
9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Dai, G., Han, K., Hui, H., & Colarelli, C. M. (2006, May). Examining measurement invariance of the Chinese Version NEO-PI-R Conscientiousness Scale. A poster presented at the 21st annual conference at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, Texas.
11. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1999, July 1). Darwinism and the roots of machoism. Scientific American, 19, 8-14.
12. Day, D. V., & Silverman, S. B. (1989). Personality and job performance: Evidence of incremental validity. Personnel Psychology, 42, 25-36.
13. Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417-440.
14. Drasgow, F. (1984). Scrutinizing psychological tests: Measurement equivalence and equivalent relations with external variables are the central issues. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 134-135.
15. Drasgow, F., & Hulin, C. L. (1990) Item response theory. In M. D. Dunnette & M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 577-636). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
16. Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (1981). Sex of researchers and sex-typed communications as determinants of sex differences in influentially: A meta-analysis of social influence studies. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 1-20.
17. Ellis, B. B., Becker, P., & Kimmel, H. D. (1993). An item response theory evaluation of an English version the Trier Personality Inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 24, 133-148.
18. Geary, D. C. (1998). Male, female. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
19. Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative "description of personality": The Big Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216-1229.
20. Gorski, R. A. (1991). Sexual differentiation of the endocrine brain and its control. In M. Motta (Ed.), Brain endocrinology (2nd ed.). New York: Raven.
21. Hartigan, J. A., & Wigdor, A. K. (1989). Fairness in employment testing: Validity generalization, minority issues, and the General Aptitude Test Battery. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
22. Hathaway, S. R., & McKinley, J. C. (1940). A multiphasic personality schedule (Minnesota): I. Construction of the schedule. Journal of Psychology, 10, 249-254.
23. Hogan, R. (1986). Manual for the Hogan Personality Inventory. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems.
24. Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (1992). Hogan Personality Inventory manual. Tulsa, OK: Hogan Assessment Systems.
25. Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braum (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26. Jensen, A. R. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press.
27. Kaihla, P. (2003, November). Getting inside the boss's head. Business 2.0, pp. 49-51.
28. Lord, F. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29. Mantel, N., & Haenszel, W. (1959). Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22, 719-748.
30. McNulty, J. L., Graham, J. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Stein, L. A. R. (1997). Comparative validity of MMPI-2 scores of African American and Caucasian mental health center clients. Psychological Assessment, 9, 464-470.
31. Millsap, R. E., & Everson, H. T. (1993). Methodology review: Statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 297-334.
32. Ones, D. S., & Anderson, N. (2002). Gender and ethnic group differences on personality scales in selection: Some British data. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 255-276.
33. Roy, R., & Benenson, J. F. (2002). Sex and contextual effects on children's use of interference competition. Developmental Psychology, 38, 306-312.
34. Roznowski, M, & Reith, J. (1999). Examining the measurement quality of tests containing differentially functioning items: Do biased items result in poor measurement? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 248-269.
35. Saad, S., & Sackett, P. R. (2002). Investigating differential prediction by sex in employment-oriented personality measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 667-674.
36. Sackett, P. R., & Wilk, S. L. (1994). Within-group norming and other forms of score adjustment in preemployment testing. American Psychologist, 49, 929-954.
37. Scheuneman, J. D., & Gerritz, K. (1990). Using differential item functioning procedures to explore sources of item difficulty and group performance characteristics. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 109-131.
38. Schmit, M. J., Kihm, A., & Robie, C. (2000). Development of a global measure of personality. Personnel Psychology, 53, 153-193.
39. Schmitt, N., Hattrup, K., & Landis, R. S. (1993). Item bias indices based on total test score and job performance estimates of ability. Personnel Psychology Special Issue: Innovations in Research Methods for Field Settings, 46, 593-611.
40. Smith, L. L. (2002). On the usefulness of item bias analysis to personality psychology. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin, 28, 754-763.
41. Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., & Rothstein, M. (1991). Personality measures as predictors of job performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 44, 703-742.
42. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Gerrard, M. (1986). Beyond group differences: The concept of item bias. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 118-128.
43. Timbrook, R. E., & Graham, J. R. (1994). Ethnic differences on the MMPI-2? Psychological Assessment, 6, 212-217.
44. Waller, N. G., Thompson, J. S., & Wenk, E. (2000). Using IRT to separate measurement bias from true group differences on homogeneous and heterogeneous scales: An illustration with the MMPI. Psychological Methods, 5, 125-146.
45. Whybrow, P. C. (2005). American mania. New York: Norton.
46. Zieky, M. (1993). Practical questions in the use of DIF statistics in test development. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 337-347). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47. Zwick, R., & Erickan, K. (1989). Analysis of differential item functioning in the NAEP history assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 55-66.