Skip to content

Research article

Personality Types and Applicant Reactions in Real-life Selection

Laura Honkaniemi; Taru Feldt; Riitta-Leena Metsäpelto; Asko Tolvanen

International Journal of Selection and Assessment • 2013

audience: factory-internalaudience: velaPeople Analyticsbridge (3)processed in meta-factory

Abstract

The study aimed to determine if an applicant’s personality type is associated with his/her reactions (fairness perceptions, face validity perceptions, and predictive validity perceptions) to the selection process. The participants (N=258) were real-life applicants for admission to a vocational school. A person-centered approach was applied to find subgroups with similar personality profiles. Latent profile analysis found four personality types: Resilient (45%), Overcontrolled (13%), Undercontrolled (10%), and Bohemian (32%). The Resilient and Bohemian personality types had more favorable perceptions of test fairness than the Overcontrolled type. Personality type did not affect face validity or predictive validity perceptions. The results suggest that personality (type) could be included in applicant reactions models and in analyses investigating the antecedents of applicant reactions.

Available formats

research_article

File instances

1

Extracted by meta-factory

Models (1)

  • Applicant Reactions Model

    evidence: Medium

    Selection Processes • Fairness/Justice

    Primary factors

    Personality TypesFairness PerceptionsFace Validity PerceptionsPredictive Validity Perceptions

    Field domains

    Organizational BehaviorI-O Psychology

Instruments (2)

  • Personality Research Form (PRF)

    developer: Jackson

    Constructs

    Personality Traits

    reliability: Cronbach’s alphas for subscales range from .59 to .83

  • Applicant Reaction Scale

    developer: Adapted from Chan et al.

    Constructs

    Face Validity PerceptionsPredictive Validity PerceptionsFairness Perceptions

    reliability: Cronbach’s alphas for subscales: Face Validity (.63), Predictive Validity (.62), Fairness Perceptions (.62)

Constructs (4)

  • Applicant Reactions

    AR_001

    Attitudes, affects, or cognitions a candidate might have about the hiring process.

    Domains

    Decision-Making & JudgmentPerformance Management

    Linked models

    Ryan & Ployhart (2000) heuristic modelGilliland (1993) organizational justice theory

    Includes face validity perceptions, predictive validity perceptions, and fairness perceptions.

  • Fairness Perceptions

    FP_002

    The degree to which the test seems to be fair and just.

    Domains

    Decision-Making & JudgmentPerformance Management

    Linked models

    Ryan & Ployhart (2000) heuristic modelGilliland (1993) organizational justice theory

    Fairness perceptions are influenced by personality types, with Resilient and Bohemian types having more favorable perceptions.

  • Face Validity Perceptions

    FVP_003

    The degree the test seems to be related to the job.

    Domains

    Decision-Making & JudgmentPerformance Management

    Linked models

    Ryan & Ployhart (2000) heuristic modelGilliland (1993) organizational justice theory

    Face validity perceptions are not significantly affected by personality types.

  • Predictive Validity Perceptions

    PVP_004

    How well the test seems to be able to predict future performance in the job.

    Domains

    Decision-Making & JudgmentPerformance Management

    Linked models

    Ryan & Ployhart (2000) heuristic modelGilliland (1993) organizational justice theory

    Predictive validity perceptions are not significantly affected by personality types.

Related

Source profile (V0). This page is a thin scaffold over the factory_documents registry; richer treatment lands once the source is ingested into Vela's editorial corpus.