Books and journals Case studies Expert Briefings Open Access
Advanced search

Search results

1 – 2 of 2
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 25 September 2007

Development of a personality biodata measure to predict ethical decision making

Gregory G. Manley, Juan Benavidez and Kristen Dunn

The purpose of this paper is to develop and test a measure designed to assess constructs that predict ethical decision making (EDM) among employees.

HTML
PDF (251 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to develop and test a measure designed to assess constructs that predict ethical decision making (EDM) among employees.

Design/methodology/approach

The approach was to target individual difference variables that are theoretically linked to EDM. This was done by generating biodata items/scales of the constructs of interest.

Findings

Two biodata scales were developed to measure locus of control and conscientiousness. Both of these scales had significant criterion‐related validities with EDM (rs=0.42 and 0.40, respectively) and predicted significant and unique variance of EDM beyond the variance predicted by trait‐based measures of the same constructs. Biodata scales exhibited little or no subgroup differences (less potential adverse impact). Research limitations/implications – Participants were working various jobs and a variety of settings, so results generalize to this eclectic population more so than one particular industry. Further research should attempt to examine effects in a specific applied setting.

Practical implications

This study outlines a method of item and scale development that produces homogonous scales that predict EDM and that can be tailored for specific organizational use.

Originality/value

The paper provides a theoretical rationale for why biodata methodology is superior to trait‐based measures and practical value for the use of biodata in measuring individual difference constructs.

Details

Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 22 no. 7
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710820091
ISSN: 0268-3946

Keywords

  • Decision making
  • Ethics
  • Personality measurement
  • Selection
  • Tests and testing
  • Biodata

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 2 May 2008

Using g alternatives to reduce subgroup differences when predicting US public‐sector performance

Gregory G. Manley and Juan Benavidez

The purpose of this paper is to bring attention to the issues of validity and subgroup differences of selection devices currently being used in the public sector.

HTML
PDF (138 KB)

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to bring attention to the issues of validity and subgroup differences of selection devices currently being used in the public sector.

Design/methodology/approach

An attempt is made to identify unfair hiring practices, particularly important within the public sector, as this area of employment is characterized by a unique set of circumstances. Among them, economic constraints, the social burden to ensure fair treatment among applicants and incumbents, and an increasingly higher expectation of quality service among customers in the public sector. This paper also explores the effectiveness of two strategies for reducing subgroup differences while maintaining or increasing criterion‐related validity.

Findings

The findings of this study are important and answer some central questions. First, g and job knowledge were the best individual predictors of overall performance criteria; second, the g, alternative, and full models all significantly predicted the performance criteria, with the alternative model predicting more variance than the g model; third, the alternative model had more incremental validity over the g model than the g model had over the alternative model; the alternative model also produced less subgroup differences for Black–White comparisons than the g model. The Native American‐White differences were larger for the alternative model compared to the g model, but these differences are considered small effects and were non‐significant in the statistical sense. The Hispanic‐White differences were also somewhat larger for the alternative model when compared to the g model; however, this result is probably unreliable due to a very small Hispanic sample size and is a small effect. Thus, the alternative model will predict performance well for similar public sector samples while producing generally smaller subgroup differences.

Originality/value

There is little extant published research examining the validity and ethnic group score differences of alternate predictors used in the US public sector and the current effort seeks to provide empirical evidence to fill this void.

Details

Equal Opportunities International, vol. 27 no. 4
Type: Research Article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/02610150810874304
ISSN: 0261-0159

Keywords

  • Public sector organizations
  • Human resource management
  • Equal opportunities
  • Predictive process
  • Mental development
  • United States of America

Access
Only content I have access to
Only Open Access
Year
  • All dates (2)
Content type
  • Article (2)
1 – 2 of 2
Emerald Publishing
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
© 2021 Emerald Publishing Limited

Services

  • Authors Opens in new window
  • Editors Opens in new window
  • Librarians Opens in new window
  • Researchers Opens in new window
  • Reviewers Opens in new window

About

  • About Emerald Opens in new window
  • Working for Emerald Opens in new window
  • Contact us Opens in new window
  • Publication sitemap

Policies and information

  • Privacy notice
  • Site policies
  • Modern Slavery Act Opens in new window
  • Chair of Trustees governance statement Opens in new window
  • COVID-19 policy Opens in new window
Manage cookies

We’re listening — tell us what you think

  • Something didn’t work…

    Report bugs here

  • All feedback is valuable

    Please share your general feedback

  • Member of Emerald Engage?

    You can join in the discussion by joining the community or logging in here.
    You can also find out more about Emerald Engage.

Join us on our journey

  • Platform update page

    Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

  • Questions & More Information

    Answers to the most commonly asked questions here