Psychology researchers have developed a new personality test that is both faster to take and much harder to manipulate by those attempting to control the outcome.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe test draws on the \u2018Big Five\u2019 approach to personality assessment, so it\u2019s a new method for personality testing, rather than a new paradigm,\u201d says Adam Meade, a professor of psychology at North Carolina State University and lead author of a paper on the work.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut whether the testing is being done as part of workplace training or for research purposes, there is real value in being able to conduct the test quickly and in making it difficult for users to game the system.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Big Five theory of personality<\/a> focuses on five broad factors: extraversion, conscientiousness, openness, neuroticism and agreeableness.<\/p>\n \u201cWe used this paradigm because it is supported by the broadest body of research and holds up across cultures and demographic groups,\u201d Meade says.<\/p>\n The new test is an online program that relies on a technique developed by Meade called rapid response measurement (RRM), which displays a series of adjectives one after another. Users have a few seconds to click whether each adjective is \u201clike me\u201d or \u201cnot like me.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cPeople take about one second, on average, to make a decision for each word,\u201d Meade says. \u201cThis allows us to collect a significant amount of data in a very short period of time \u2013 orders of magnitude faster than other tests. The rapid response rate also makes it difficult to manipulate the outcome, and our software incorporates response time into its analysis of responses. For example, if users take too long to respond to an adjective, that response does not have as much impact on scores as adjectives with faster responses.\u201d<\/p>\n Altogether, the new paper includes the results from four studies. In three of the studies, involving a total of 425 participants, researchers evaluated the accuracy of the RRM Big Five test when compared to well-established Big Five testing protocols. All three studies found that the results were comparable, even though the RRM technique took far less time.<\/p>\n In the third study, involving 205 people, researchers also ran an iteration of the test asking study participants to manipulate the outcome. They found it was four times harder for participants to alter the outcome of the RRM test, as compared to the conventional test.<\/p>\n And the RRM protocol can be used to assess things other than the Big Five.<\/p>\n The paper\u2019s fourth study focused on workplace personality testing and involved 228 business managers from across the United States. For this study, researchers compared the results of the RRM test to an established workplace personality test \u2013 and to assessments from the study participants\u2019 real-world supervisors and peers. The RRM test results tracked more closely with the actual workplace assessments than the traditional tests did.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re optimistic that our approach can streamline the testing process and provide more accurate information for use in training, hiring and research,\u201d Meade says.<\/p>\n Meade has launched a company called PerSight Assessments<\/a> to market RRM testing for use by employers, and also plans to make a free version available for the research community.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re now working on adapting RRM to measure attitudes toward workplace satisfaction, workplace culture and consumer feedback,\u201d Meade says. \u201cIt\u2019s a flexible tool, and there are likely applications we haven\u2019t even thought of yet.\u201d<\/p>\n The paper, \u201cDevelopment of a Faking-Resistant Assessment Method for Personality<\/a>,\u201d is published in the journal Organizational Research Methods<\/em>. The paper was co-authored by Gabriel Pappalardo, a former Ph.D. student at NC State; and Phillip Braddy and John Fleenor of the Center for Creative Leadership.<\/p>\n -shipman-<\/p>\n Note to Editors:<\/strong> The study abstract follows.<\/p>\n \u201cDevelopment of a Faking-Resistant Assessment Method for Personality\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Authors<\/em>: Adam W. Meade and Gabriel Pappalardo, North Carolina State University; Phillip Braddy and John Fleenor, Center for Creative Leadership<\/p>\n Published<\/em>: Aug. 29, Organizational Research Methods<\/em><\/p>\n DOI<\/em>: 10.1177\/1094428118795295<\/p>\n Abstract<\/em>: While rating-scale-based assessments have been shown to be useful for measuring a variety of workplace-relevant constructs, assessment length and response distortion present practical limitations on their use. We describe a new type of measurement method termed rapid response measurement (RRM) in which stimuli are presented on a computer screen one at a time in rapid succession and respondents are asked to quickly provide a dichotomous response. Two personality assessments using RRM were developed and reliability and validity evidence across four independent samples were evaluated. Both RRM assessments showed adequate reliability, even at short test lengths, with acceptable levels of convergent and discriminant validity with traditional survey-based measures. Analyses based on a within-participants design indicated that the RRM was significantly more difficult to fake when instructed than was a survey-based measure of personality. The second RRM was related to several aspects of job performance. While initial results show promise, further research is needed to establish the validity and viability of the RRM for organizational and psychological measurement.<\/p>\n This post was originally published<\/a> in NC State News.<\/em><\/p>","protected":false,"raw":"Psychology researchers have developed a new personality test that is both faster to take and much harder to manipulate by those attempting to control the outcome.\r\n\r\n\u201cThe test draws on the \u2018Big Five\u2019 approach to personality assessment, so it\u2019s a new method for personality testing, rather than a new paradigm,\u201d says Adam Meade, a professor of psychology at North Carolina State University and lead author of a paper on the work.\r\n\r\n\u201cBut whether the testing is being done as part of workplace training or for research purposes, there is real value in being able to conduct the test quickly and in making it difficult for users to game the system.\u201d\r\n\r\nThe Big Five theory of personality<\/a> focuses on five broad factors: extraversion, conscientiousness, openness, neuroticism and agreeableness.\r\n\r\n\u201cWe used this paradigm because it is supported by the broadest body of research and holds up across cultures and demographic groups,\u201d Meade says.\r\n\r\nThe new test is an online program that relies on a technique developed by Meade called rapid response measurement (RRM), which displays a series of adjectives one after another. Users have a few seconds to click whether each adjective is \u201clike me\u201d or \u201cnot like me.\u201d\r\n\r\n\u201cPeople take about one second, on average, to make a decision for each word,\u201d Meade says. \u201cThis allows us to collect a significant amount of data in a very short period of time \u2013 orders of magnitude faster than other tests. The rapid response rate also makes it difficult to manipulate the outcome, and our software incorporates response time into its analysis of responses. For example, if users take too long to respond to an adjective, that response does not have as much impact on scores as adjectives with faster responses.\u201d\r\n\r\nAltogether, the new paper includes the results from four studies. In three of the studies, involving a total of 425 participants, researchers evaluated the accuracy of the RRM Big Five test when compared to well-established Big Five testing protocols. All three studies found that the results were comparable, even though the RRM technique took far less time.\r\n\r\nIn the third study, involving 205 people, researchers also ran an iteration of the test asking study participants to manipulate the outcome. They found it was four times harder for participants to alter the outcome of the RRM test, as compared to the conventional test.\r\n\r\nAnd the RRM protocol can be used to assess things other than the Big Five.\r\n\r\nThe paper\u2019s fourth study focused on workplace personality testing and involved 228 business managers from across the United States. For this study, researchers compared the results of the RRM test to an established workplace personality test \u2013 and to assessments from the study participants\u2019 real-world supervisors and peers. The RRM test results tracked more closely with the actual workplace assessments than the traditional tests did.\r\n\r\n\u201cWe\u2019re optimistic that our approach can streamline the testing process and provide more accurate information for use in training, hiring and research,\u201d Meade says.\r\n\r\nMeade has launched a company called PerSight Assessments<\/a> to market RRM testing for use by employers, and also plans to make a free version available for the research community.\r\n\r\n\u201cWe\u2019re now working on adapting RRM to measure attitudes toward workplace satisfaction, workplace culture and consumer feedback,\u201d Meade says. \u201cIt\u2019s a flexible tool, and there are likely applications we haven\u2019t even thought of yet.\u201d\r\n\r\nThe paper, \u201cDevelopment of a Faking-Resistant Assessment Method for Personality<\/a>,\u201d is published in the journal Organizational Research Methods<\/em>. The paper was co-authored by Gabriel Pappalardo, a former Ph.D. student at NC State; and Phillip Braddy and John Fleenor of the Center for Creative Leadership.\r\n -shipman-<\/p>\r\nNote to Editors:<\/strong> The study abstract follows.\r\n\r\n\u201cDevelopment of a Faking-Resistant Assessment Method for Personality\u201d<\/strong>\r\n\r\nAuthors<\/em>: Adam W. Meade and Gabriel Pappalardo, North Carolina State University; Phillip Braddy and John Fleenor, Center for Creative Leadership\r\n\r\nPublished<\/em>: Aug. 29, Organizational Research Methods<\/em>\r\n\r\nDOI<\/em>: 10.1177\/1094428118795295\r\n\r\nAbstract<\/em>: While rating-scale-based assessments have been shown to be useful for measuring a variety of workplace-relevant constructs, assessment length and response distortion present practical limitations on their use. We describe a new type of measurement method termed rapid response measurement (RRM) in which stimuli are presented on a computer screen one at a time in rapid succession and respondents are asked to quickly provide a dichotomous response. Two personality assessments using RRM were developed and reliability and validity evidence across four independent samples were evaluated. Both RRM assessments showed adequate reliability, even at short test lengths, with acceptable levels of convergent and discriminant validity with traditional survey-based measures. Analyses based on a within-participants design indicated that the RRM was significantly more difficult to fake when instructed than was a survey-based measure of personality. The second RRM was related to several aspects of job performance. While initial results show promise, further research is needed to establish the validity and viability of the RRM for organizational and psychological measurement."},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Psychology researchers have developed a new personality test that is both faster to take and much harder to manipulate by those attempting to control the outcome.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":173,"featured_media":20132,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"source":"ncstate_wire","ncst_custom_author":"","ncst_show_custom_author":false,"ncst_dynamicHeaderBlockName":"","ncst_dynamicHeaderData":"","ncst_content_audit_freq":"","ncst_content_audit_date":"","ncst_content_audit_display":false,"ncst_backToTopFlag":"","footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[101],"_ncst_magazine_issue":[],"class_list":["post-19945","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-_from-newswire-collection-81"],"displayCategory":null,"acf":{"ncst_posts_meta_modified_date":null},"yoast_head":"\n