The Problem with Academia as a Medium of Change or Critique
I have received a lot of correspondence that notes a genuine surprise at the reality of the discipline of I/O psychology. Many people wonder why there is not more of an outcry from academic practitioners for change. The answer to this is it is simply not in the nature of
What Are The Areas Where Qualitative Methodologies May Be Appropriate?
What are the areas where qualitative methodologies may be appropriate? I have discussed before the limitations of the discipline as a quantitative science, an issue that has been around since the mid-1900s. When one critically reviews the discipline that is psychology, quantitative science rarely comes to mind. The great theorists
The Relevance of I/O Psychology
A recent email I received asked why I so openly critique my own discipline. The answer to this is actually simple; because I’m passionate about psychology and psychology applied to work. If psychology is to be relevant to the world of work, it must first be honest with its self.
Psychometricians Take a Bow!
Today I only have time for a very short blog. This is a tribute blog to one of the areas of psychology that I have been involved in for many years – psychometrics. Without going into the whys and wherefores of the discipline, I wanted to say that this is
Divide 2: The UK/US Divide
For those who are unfamiliar with I/O psychology, it is often surprising to find out that the US and UK have very different histories and philosophies. These differences were discussed in a couple of articles in the June 2006 Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. I share two abstracts with
Ipsative Tests: Psychometric Properties
In this final blog, I want to look at the psychometric properties of ipsative measures and also look at the supporting evidence for ipsative tests.
Why Do People Recommend Ipsative Tools for Selection If They Are Not Designed for That Purpose?
There are two reasons that people recommend ipsative measures for selection. The first is a misbelief that they are less resistant to faking and therefore produce more valid results. The second is that marketing is fundamentally about having a point of difference.
Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) and Ipsative Personality Assessments
There appears to be a resurgence of ipsative testing under the veil of CAT (Computer Adaptive Testing) for personality. Clearly, there is a lot more quality research that must go on to develop a CAT for personality than the simple ipsative tests the market has seen before. In regards to
Faking and It’s Implication for the Use of Personality Tests
Faking in personality tests exists. Anyone who tries to deny this is either a liar or deluded. The question is what this means for the application of personality tests for selection. At one end of the spectrum, there are those that would argue that this completely invalidates the use of
Are Personality Tests Really That Different?
One of the myths I have long spoken about is the idea that there are great differences between various psychological tests. In essence, the argument is that if there is a science to personality, or cognitive ability, what they measure must be similar. This is fundamental to the basis for