The focus of this page is personality assessment research 2023 and more general personality assessment research.
An Associate Fellow of the British Psychological Society, Rob Williams is a Chartered Psychologist with over 25 years of experience working and designing tests. He is also the author of five psychometric test design books and has worked for the leading global psychometric test publishers including SHL, Kenexa IBM, MBTI, CAPP and SOVA Assessment.
Personality Assessment Research
Previous projects that have encompassed personality assessment designs:
- Fit based personality profiles for a call centre
- CV-based sifting design (finance and business consultancy sectors)
- Online competency based sift questionnaires
In 2015 and 2018, Rob Williams Assessment Ltd developed two bespoke personality test designs. These were for the graduate recruiters Talent Window and Hire Window. A positive client recommendation for this project can be found on on Linked-In.
Firstly, my client Talent Window required a rational model of the personality traits typically sought by graduate employers.
Recent personality test innovations
The Bloomberg Financial Test assesses applications for a multitude of financial roles. It is a measure of “financial aptitude” – not a personality test.
The NEO PI-R personality test established a link between Big 5 personality traits and those personality traits found in successful financial traders. Three key personality domains mentioned in this personality test research: Extroversion, Neuroticism and Openness to Experience.
Personality research – Assessment designs
Personality tests vary considerably in length, from short Big Five measures (around 10 minutes) to in-depth measures with 16-32 scales (taking 35-50 minutes). Personality testing is less commonly used at the school-leaver level – compared to the graduate and managerial levels.
Personality is untimed but takes from 5-6 minutes for a Disc-like instrument to 25 mins for a 16PF.
Personality research 2019
Bornstein, R. F. (2003). Behaviorally referenced experimentation
and symptom validation: A paradigm for 21st-century
personality disorder research. Journal of Personality Disorders,
17, 1–18.
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.
– – – Personality Assessment Research – – –
Fontana, A., & Rosenbeck, R. (2004). Comparing traditional
and Rasch analyses of the Mississippi PTSD Scale: Revealing
limitations of reverse-scored items.
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.
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.
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 research Part III
Gore, W. L., & Widiger, T. A. (2013). The DSM-5 dimensional
trait model and five-factor models of general personality.
Guenole, N. (2014). Maladaptive personality at work: Exploring
the darkness. Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
Cockerill, T., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Smillie,
L. D. (2011). Evidence for the validity of dimensions in the
presence of rater source factors.
Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (2001). Assessing leadership. A view
from the dark side.
Judge, T. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). The bright and dark sides
of personality: Implications for personnel selection in
individual and team contexts.
Personality assessment research Part IV
Kolenikov, S., & Bollen, K. A. (2012). Testing negative error
variances is a Heywood case a symptom of mispecification?
Krueger, R. F. (1999). The structure of common mental
disorders.
Skodol, A. V. (2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive
personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5.
Lykken, D. T. (1968). Statistical significance in psychological
research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151–159.
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment.
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.
– – – Personality Assessment Research – – –
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.
– – – Personality Assessment Research – – –
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.
Personality tests research 2019
Bornstein, R. F. (2003). Behaviorally referenced experimentation
and symptom validation: A paradigm for 21st-century
personality disorder research. Journal of Personality Disorders,
17, 1–18.
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.
Fontana, A., & Rosenbeck, R. (2004). Comparing traditional
and Rasch analyses of the Mississippi PTSD Scale: Revealing
limitations of reverse-scored items.
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.
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.
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.
Tests research 2019
Personality tests research Part III
Gore, W. L., & Widiger, T. A. (2013). The DSM-5 dimensional
trait model and five-factor models of general personality.
Guenole, N. (2014). Maladaptive personality at work: Exploring
the darkness. Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
Cockerill, T., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Smillie,
L. D. (2011). Evidence for the validity of dimensions in the
presence of rater source factors.
Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (2001). Assessing leadership. A view
from the dark side.
Judge, T. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). The bright and dark sides
of personality: Implications for personnel selection in
individual and team contexts.
Personality tests research Part IV
Kolenikov, S., & Bollen, K. A. (2012). Testing negative error
variances is a Heywood case a symptom of mispecification?
Krueger, R. F. (1999). The structure of common mental
disorders.
Skodol, A. V. (2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive
personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5.
Lykken, D. T. (1968). Statistical significance in psychological
research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151–159.
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment.
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.
Personality tests research 2019
Research 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.
Extra Psychometric Test Practice
- Strengths Assessment Practice.
- Practice career tests.
- RAF Psychometric Test.
- Armed forces test practice.
- EPSO Test Practice.
- EPSO Practice.
- Aptitude test practice.
Social Desirability Personality Research 2019
| Anguiano-Carrasco, C., MacCann, C., Geiger, M., Seybert, J. |
| M., & Roberts, R. D. (2014). Development of a forcedchoice |
| measure of typical-performance emotional intelligence. |
| Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33, 83-97. |
| Bartram, D. (2007). Increasing validity with forced-choice |
| criterion measurement formats. International Journal of |
| Selection and Assessment, 15, 263-272. doi:10.1111/j.1468- |
| Funder, D. C. (1995). On the accuracy of personality judgment: A |
| realistic approach. Psychological Review, 102, 652-670. |
| Personality, 81, 155-170. |
| Colvin, C. R., Block, J., & Funder, D. C. (1995). Overly positive |
| self-evaluations and personality: Negative implications for |
| mental health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, |
| Funder, D. C. (1995). On the accuracy of personality judgment: A |
| realistic approach. Psychological Review, 102, 652-670. |
| Jin, K. Y., & Wang, W. C. (2014). Generalized IRT models for |
| extreme response style. Educational and Psychological |
| Joubert, T., Inceoglu, I., Bartram, D., Dowdeswell, K., & Lin, Y. |
| (2015). A comparison of the psychometric properties of the |
| forced choice and Likert scale versions of a personality instrument. |
| International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 23, |
| Khorramdel, L., & von Davier, M. (2014). Measuring response |
| styles across the Big Five: A multiscale extension of an |
| approach using multinomial processing trees. Multivariate |
| Behavioral Research, 49, 161-177. doi:10.1080/00273171. |
| Messick, S. J. (1967). The psychology of acquiescence: An interpretation |
| of research evidence. In I. A. Berg (Ed.), Response |
| set in personality assessment (pp. 115-145). Chicago, IL: |
| Paulhus, D. L. (2002). Socially desirable responding: The evolution |
| of a construct. In H. I. Braun, D. N. Jackson, & D. E. |
Verbal Reasoning practice test book
Numerical Reasoning practice test book
10 personality tips to help your Study Skills
- Find time to study – If you manage your time badly, inevitably you will be less productive than if you manage it well. This can lead to increased stress and anxiety levels, especially around exam time.
- Keep to a routine – Work in the same place at the same time each day. Also, make sure you have everything you need before you start.
- Work to your strengths – Schedule challenging tasks for when you are most alert, and routine ones for when you may be feeling more tired.
- Don’t waste time – Rather than reading irrelevant material, skim and scan to help you decide if you need to read something critically and in-depth.
- Avoid distractions – Related to above. Switch emails and social media off to prevent your mind wandering while trying to learn new information!
- Regularly review your notes – Edit out what you don’t need. Ask yourself the question: “Is this information is relevant to my assignment, and how does it relate to what I already know.”
- Vary how you to take notes – For example, use Mind Maps and diagrams to generate ideas and linear notes to focus your ideas for essay or report plans.
- Be critical – Make sure that you always add your own comment to every concept or quotation that you write down. Maintain a critical and analytical approach at all times!
- Plan your work – If writing an assignment produce a detailed plan before you start to write it. This will make the drafting process much less stressful
- Understand different styles – By understanding different writing styles – such as academic, journal and journalistic styles – you can put what you read into perspective. In particular, you can become more aware of any particular bias.
Our other personality test blogs
Our personality test tips and Bespoke personality test designs.
– – – Personality Assessment Research – – –