Paul R. Sackett

Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance, and their common correlates: a review and meta-analysis.

Interpersonal deviance (ID) and organizational deviance (OD) are highly correlated (R. S. Dalal, 2005). This, together with other empirical and theoretical evidence, calls into question the separability of ID and OD. As a further investigation into their separability, relationships among ID, OD, and their common correlates were meta-analyzed. ID and OD were highly correlated (rho = .62) but had differential relationships with key Big Five variables and organizational citizenship behaviors, which lends support to the separability of ID and OD. Whether the R. J. Bennett and S. L. Robinson (2000) instrument was used moderated some relationships. ID and OD exhibited their strongest (negative) relationships with organizational citizenship, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability. Correlations with organizational justice were small to moderate, and correlations with demographic variables were generally negligible.

Investigating the Dimensionality of Counterproductive Work Behavior

The study investigated the dimensionality of counterproductive work behavior (CWB) by examining the relationships between various counterproductive behaviors. Utilizing a university alumni sample (N = 343), data was collected through both self-report and direct judgments of the likelihood of co-occurrence. Eleven categories of CWB were examined: (1) Theft and Related Behavior; (2) Destruction of Property; (3) Misuse of Information; (4) Misuse of Time and Resources; (5) Unsafe Behavior; (6) Poor Attendance; (7) Poor Quality Work; (8) Alcohol Use; (9) Drug Use; (10) Inappropriate Verbal Actions; and (11) Inappropriate Physical Actions. CWB items and categories were generally positively related. Multidimensional scaling analysis suggests that the CWB categories vary on two dimensions: an Interpersonal-Organizational dimension and a Task Relevance dimension.

Social desirability corrections in personality measurement: Issues of applicant comparison and construct validity

Research investigating the validity of personality measures has established these measures as useful selection tools. However, personality measures are vulnerable to response distortion leading to employer concerns about the influence of applicant faking, with specific concerns about the influence of social desirability. A traditional method used to circumvent this is the application of a correction based on a social desirability scale score. This study sought to evaluate whether such corrections are effective tools for removing the influence of intentional distortion. A within-subjects design facilitated comparisons between honest, faked, and corrected scores. The goal was to evaluate whether a social desirability correction allows one to approximate an individuals honest score. The results suggest that a social desirability correction is ineffective and fails to produce a corrected score that approximates an honest score. Results are interpreted with respect to applicant comparison and construct validity.

Correction for range restriction: an expanded typology.

A common research problem is the estimation of the population correlation between x and y from an observed correlation rxy obtained from a sample that has been restricted because of some sample selection process. Methods of correcting sample correlations for range restriction in a limited set of conditions are well-known. An expanded classification scheme for range-restriction scenarios is developed that conceptualizes range-restriction scenarios from various combinations of the following facets: (a) the variable(s) on which selection occurs (x, y and/or a 3rd variable z), (b) whether unrestricted variances for the relevant variables are known, and (c) whether a 3rd variable, if involved, is measured or unmeasured. On the basis of these facets, the authors describe potential solutions for 11 different range-restriction scenarios and summarize research to date on these techniques.

The Structure of Counterproductive Work Behaviors: Dimensionality and Relationships with Facets of Job Performance

Personnel selection as an applied domain of work and organizational psychology has over one century of scientific history. This paper presents a historical account of the last 100 years of personnel selection by presenting some of the more important landmarks of the discipline. This historical account includes events, theoretical contributions, and methodological advances that have consolidated the discipline as a scientific one. The paper also serves as an introduction to the second part of the special issue devoted to the presentation of the state-of-art of personnel selection at the beginning of the XXIst Century.

A meta-analytic review of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment.

Research on gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment informs an ongoing legal debate regarding the use of a reasonable person standard instead of a reasonable woman standard to evaluate sexual harassment claims. The authors report a meta-analysis of 62 studies of gender differences in harassment perceptions. An earlier quantitative review combined all types of social-sexual behaviors for a single meta-analysis; the purpose of this study was to investigate whether the magnitude of the female-male difference varies by type of behavior. An overall standardized mean difference of 0.30 was found, suggesting that women perceive a broader range of social-sexual behaviors as harassing. However, the meta-analysis also found that the female-male difference was larger for behaviors that involve hostile work environment harassment, derogatory attitudes toward women, dating pressure, or physical sexual contact than sexual propositions or sexual coercion.

Within-group norming and other forms of score adjustment in preemployment testing.

Various forms of score adjustment have been suggested and used when mean differences by gender, race, or ethnicity are found using preemployment tests. This article examines the rationales for score adjustment and describes and compares different forms of score adjustment, including within-group norming, bonus points, separate cutoffs, and banding. It reviews the legal environment for personnel selection and the circumstances leading to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. It examines score adjustment in the use of cognitive ability tests, personality inventories, interest inventories, scored biographical data, and physical ability tests and outlines the implications for testing practice of various interpretations of the Civil Rights Act of 1991.

Investigating the influence of social desirability on personality factor structure.

This study provides a comprehensive investigation into whether social desirability alters the factor structure of personality measures. The study brought together 4 large data sets wherein different organizational samples responded to different personality measures. This facilitated conducting 4 separate yet parallel investigations. Within each data set, individuals identified through a social desirability scale as responding in an honest manner were grouped together, and individuals identified as responding in a highly socially desirable manner were grouped together. Using various analyses, the fit of higher order factor structure models was compared across the 2 groups. Results were the same for each data set. Social desirability had little influence on the higher order factor structures that characterized the relationships among the scales of the personality measures.

High-Stakes Testing in Higher Education and Employment: Appraising the Evidence for Validity and Fairness

The authors review criticisms commonly leveled against cognitively loaded tests used for employment and higher education admissions decisions, with a focus on large-scale databases and meta-analytic evidence. They conclude that (a) tests of developed abilities are generally valid for their intended uses in predicting a wide variety of aspects of short-term and long-term academic and job performance, (b) validity is not an artifact of socioeconomic status, (c) coaching is not a major determinant of test performance, (d) tests do not generally exhibit bias by underpredicting the performance of minority group members, and (e) test-taking motivational mechanisms are not major determinants of test performance in these high-stakes settings.

Citizenship and Counterproductive Behavior: Clarifying Relations Between the Two Domains

Competing viewpoints exist as to whether organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) and counterproductive work behaviors (CWB) are best viewed as behaviors located on a single continuum or as distinct constructs. Reliable and established measures of OCB, CWB, and the Big Five were administered to a large and diverse employee sample. Confirmatory factor analysis supports differentiating between facets of OCB and CWB. In addition, OCB and CWB were moderately negatively correlated and had a number of different personality correlates. This lends support to OCB and CWB representing two distinct constructs instead of a single continuum.