International Journal of Selection and Assessment 

About: International Journal of Selection and Assessment is an academic journal published by Wiley-Blackwell. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Personality & Personnel selection. It has an ISSN identifier of 0965-075X. Over the lifetime, 1046 publications have been published receiving 37805 citations.

Personality and Performance at the Beginning of the New Millennium: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go Next?

Abstract: As we begin the new millennium, it is an appropriate time to examine what we have learned about personality-performance relationships over the past century and to embark on new directions for research. In this study we quantitatively summarize the results of 15 prior meta-analytic studies that have investigated the relationship between the Five Factor Model (FFM) personality traits and job performance. Results support the previous findings that conscientiousness is a valid predictor across performance measures in all occupations studied. Emotional stability was also found to be a generalizable predictor when overall work performance was the criterion, but its relationship to specific performance criteria and occupations was less consistent than was conscientiousness. Though the other three Big Five traits (extraversion, openness and agreeableness) did not predict overall work performance, they did predict success in specific occupations or relate to specific criteria. The studies upon which these results are based comprise most of the research that has been conducted on this topic in the past century. Consequently, we call for a moratorium on meta-analytic studies of the type reviewed in our study and recommend that researchers embark on a new research agenda designed to further our understanding of personalityperformance linkages.

Perspectives on Models of Job Performance

Abstract: Contemporary models of job performance are reviewed. Links between task performance, contextual performance, organizational citizenship behaviors, counterproductivity and organizational deviance are pointed out. Measurement issues in constructing generic models applicable across jobs are discussed. Implications for human resource management in general, and performance appraisal for selection and assessment in particular, are explored. It is pointed out that the different dimensions or facets of individual job performance hypothesized in the literature are positively correlated. This positive manifold suggests the presence of a general factor which represents a common variance shared across all the dimensions or facets. Although no consensus exists in the extant literature on the meaning and source of this shared variance (i.e., the general factor), rater idiosyncratic halo alone does not explain this general factor. Future research should explain the common individual differences determinants of performance dimensions.

The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Counterproductive Behaviors

Abstract: Little systematic research on personality measures has been directed at investigating whether the Big Five are predictors of counterproductive behaviors such as absenteeism, accidents, deviant behaviors, and turnover. For example, published meta-analyses did not investigate whether the Big Five personality factors predicted these criteria. The results of the meta-analyses carried out here showed that conscientiousness predicted deviant behaviors and turnover, and extroversion, openness, agreeableness and emotional stability predicted the turnover criterion. However, none of the Big Five personality measures were found to be predictors of absenteeism or accidents. The implications of these findings for future research and practice are discussed.

Fixed Effects vs. Random Effects Meta‐Analysis Models: Implications for Cumulative Research Knowledge

Abstract: Research conclusions in the social sciences are increasingly based on meta-analysis, making questions of the accuracy of meta-analysis critical to the integrity of the base of cumulative knowledge. Both fixed effects (FE) and random effects (RE) meta-analysis models have been used widely in published meta-analyses. This article shows that FE models typically manifest a substantial Type I bias in significance tests for mean effect sizes and for moderator variables (interactions), while RE models do not. Likewise, FE models, but not RE models, yield confidence intervals for mean effect sizes that are narrower than their nominal width, thereby overstating the degree of precision in meta-analysis findings. This article demonstrates analytically that these biases in FE procedures are large enough to create serious distortions in conclusions about cumulative knowledge in the research literature. We therefore recommend that RE methods routinely be employed in meta-analysis in preference to FE methods.

Personality predictors of citizenship performance

Abstract: This article briefly introduces the criterion construct, citizenship performance, describes how this construct is different from task performance and presents a recently derived 3-dimension model of the domain. Evidence is then reviewed for links between personality constructs and citizenship performance. An update of the Organ and Ryan (1995) meta-analysis of personality-organizational citizenship behavior relationships suggests slightly higher correlations than those found in the meta-analysis and also indicates that personality, at least the conscientiousness and dependability constructs, correlates more highly with citizenship performance than with task performance. These results are discussed in the broader context of building models of job performance and studying linkages between individual differences and relatively specific criterion constructs.