Using personality tests in leadership development: Test format effects and the mitigating impact of explanations and feedback
✍ Scribed by Lynn K. Harland
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 2003
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 115 KB
- Volume
- 14
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 1044-8004
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
Abstract
Organizations using personality tests in management development programs must choose from an array of
personality tests and formats. The most common formats are normative (for example, Likert type) and
forced choice. Although there are some potential advantages to using the forced‐choice format for
development, it is possible that participants may view the forced‐choice format more negatively than the
normative format. Hypothesis 1 proposed that participants would initially view the forced‐choice format as
less accurate, less respectful, less useful, and providing less test taker control. Hypothesis 2 proposed that an
explanation of forced‐choice format benefits would mitigate initial negative reactions. Finally, hypothesis
3 proposed that receiving test feedback would mitigate negative perceptions of forced‐choice format
accuracy and usefulness. The participants, 255 part‐time M.B.A. students in a leadership development
course, were randomly assigned to three experimental conditions: normative, forced choice with an explanation, and
forced choice with no explanation.