The current state of play in 2018 for personality tests and for personality test trends is discussed below.
Personality tests in 2018
Still, the principle behind biodata is behavioural consistency; that past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour.
Not all future behaviour is expected to be predicted; for recruitment purposes biodata can only give an indication of which behaviours – both desirable and undesirable in the workplace – is likely to be repeated.
Personality Tests Trend 2018 – Biodata questions
Personality biodata questions measure a variety of constructs, including attitudes, personality attributes, interests, skills/abilities, past events and experiences. An individual’s learning history is of particular interest.
Personality tests research 2018 Part I
Asparouhov, T., & Muthn, B. (2009). Exploratory structural
equation modeling. Structural EquationModeling, 16, 397–438.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural
models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonnet, D. C. (1980). Significance tests and
goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.
Bornstein, R. F. (2003). Behaviorally referenced experimentation
and symptom validation: A paradigm for 21st-century
personality disorder research. Journal of Personality Disorders,
Clark, S. L., Muthn, B., Kaprio, J., D’Onofrio, B. M., Viken,
R., & Rose, R. J. (2013). Models and strategies for factor
mixture analysis: An example concerning the structure
underlying psychological disorders. Structural Equation
Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 20, 681–703.
Personality tests research 2018 Part II
Fontana, A., & Rosenbeck, R. (2004). Comparing traditional
and Rasch analyses of the Mississippi PTSD Scale: Revealing
limitations of reverse-scored items. Journal of Applied
Measurement, 5, 15–30.
De Fruyt, F., & Salgado, J. F. (2003). Applied personality
psychology: Lessons learned from the IWO field. European
Journal of Personality, 17(S1), S123–S131.
Dilchert, S., Ones, D. S., & Krueger, R. F. (2014). Maladaptive
personality constructs, measures, and work behaviors.
Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on
Science and Practice, 7, 98–110.
Furnham, A., Guenole, N., Levine, S. J., & Chamorro-Premuzic,
T. (in press). The NEO-PI-R: Factor structure and gender
invariance from exploratory structural equation modeling
analyses in a high-stakes setting. Assessment, 20, 14–23.
Furnham, A., McManus, I. C., & Scott, D. (2003). Personality,
empathy, and attitudes to animal welfare. Anthrozoçs, 16,
Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006).
The international personality item pool and the future of
public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in
Personality, 40, 84–96.
Personality tests research 2018 Part III
Gore, W. L., & Widiger, T. A. (2013). The DSM-5 dimensional
trait model and five-factor models of general personality.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 816–821.
Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004).
Should we trust web-based studies. American Psychologist,
Guenole, N. (2014). Maladaptive personality at work: Exploring
the darkness. Industrial and Organizational Psychology:
Perspectives on Science and Practice, 7, 85–97.
Guenole, N., Cockerill, T., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Smillie,
L. D. (2011). Evidence for the validity of dimensions in the
presence of rater source factors. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice and Research, 63, 203–218.
Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (2001). Assessing leadership. A view
from the dark side. International Journal of Selection and
Assessment, 9, 40–51.
Judge, T. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). The bright and dark sides
of personality: Implications for personnel selection in
individual and team contexts. In J. Langan-Fox, C. Cooper,
& R. Klimoski (Eds.), Research companion to the dysfunctional
workplace: Management challenges and symptoms
(pp. 332–355). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Personality tests research 2018 Part IV
Kolenikov, S., & Bollen, K. A. (2012). Testing negative error
variances is a Heywood case a symptom of misspecification?
Sociological Methods & Research, 41, 124–167.
Krueger, R. F. (1999). The structure of common mental
disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 921–926.
Krueger, R. F., Derringer, J., Markon, K. E., Watson, D., &
Skodol, A. V. (2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive
personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5. Psychological
Medicine, 42, 1879–1890.
Lykken, D. T. (1968). Statistical significance in psychological
research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151–159.
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Muthn, L. K., & Muthn, B. (2006). Mplus: User’s guide.
O’Boyle, E. H., Forsyth, D. R., Banks, G. C., & McDaniel,
M. A. (2012). A meta-analysis of the Dark Triad and work
behavior: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 97, 557–579.
Personality tests research 2018 Part V
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. (2002). The Dark Triad of
personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy.
Morey, L. C., Verheul, R., Krueger, R. F., & Siever, L. J.
(2011). Proposed changes in personality and personality
disorder assessment and diagnosis for DSM-5 Part II:
Clinical application. Personality Disorders: Theory,
Research, and Treatment, 2, 23–40.
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification:
An interval estimation approach. Multivariate
Behavioral Research, 25, 214–12.
Wille, B., De Fruyt, F., & De Clercq, B. (2014). Fifty shades of
personality: Integrating Five-Factor Model Bright and Dark
sides of personality at work. Industrial & Organizational
Psychology, 7, 121–126.
Woods, M. (2006). Careless responding to reverse-worded items:
Implications for confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of
Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 28, 186–191.
Wright, A. G., Thomas, K. M., Hopwood, C. J., Markon, K. E.,
Pincus, A. L., & Krueger, R. F. (2012). The hierarchical
structure of DSM-5 pathological