Industrial and organizational personality researchers and practitioners contend with ever-changing requirements of the workplace, and therefore, it is important to reevaluate and innovate with respect to useful organizational research. Much research evidence documents the importance of personality variables in determining behavior and performance in work settings, yet further advances in understanding and predicting work outcomes will depend upon more sophisticated taxonomic structures of personality, better criterion constructs and measurement, and different validation strategies. We describe the logic, strengths, and weaknesses of four taxonomic approaches to the structure of personality—the Five-Factor Model, HEXACO model, circumplex models, and nomological-web clustering—and how each limits or facilitates future developments in theory and practice. We describe how improved measurement and modeling approaches to personality, along with advances in synthetic validation efforts, will enable greater accuracy in our theories, hypotheses, and prediction of work outcomes.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Allport GW, Odbert HS. 1936. Trait-names: a psycho-lexical study. Psychol. Monogr 47: i–171 [Google Scholar]
  2. Almagor M, Tellegen A, Waller NG. 1995. The Big Seven Model: a cross-cultural replication and further exploration of the basic dimensions of natural language trait descriptors. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 69:300–7 [Google Scholar]
  3. Ashton MC. 1998. Personality and job performance: the importance of narrow traits. J. Organ. Behav. 19:289–303 [Google Scholar]
  4. Ashton MC, Jackson DN, Helmes E, Paunonen SV. 1998a. Joint factor analysis of the Personality Research Form and the Jackson Personality Inventory: comparisons with the Big Five. J. Res. Personal. 32:243–50 [Google Scholar]
  5. Ashton MC, Jackson DN, Paunonen SV, Helmes E, Rothstein MG. 1995. The criterion validity of broad factor scales versus specific facet scales. J. Res. Personal. 29:432–42 [Google Scholar]
  6. Ashton MC, Lee K. 2005. Honesty-humility, the Big Five, and the Five-Factor Model. J. Personal. 73:1321–53 [Google Scholar]
  7. Ashton MC, Lee K. 2007. Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 11:150–66 [Google Scholar]
  8. Ashton MC, Lee K. 2008a. The HEXACO model of personality structure. The Sage Handbook of Personality Theory and Assessment Vol. 2 Boyle G, Matthews G, Saklofske D. 239–60 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  9. Ashton MC, Lee K. 2008b. The prediction of honesty-humility-related criteria by the HEXACO and Five-Factor models of personality. J. Res. Personal. 42:1216–28 [Google Scholar]
  10. Ashton MC, Lee K, de Vries RE. 2014. The HEXACO honesty-humility, agreeableness, and emotionality factors: a review of research and theory. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 18:139–52 [Google Scholar]
  11. Ashton MC, Lee K, de Vries RE, Szarota P, Marcus B et al. 2006. Lexical studies of personality structure: an examination of six-factor solutions. Presented at the Eur. Conf. Personal., 13th, July 22–26, Athens, Greece
  12. Ashton MC, Lee K, Goldberg LR. 2004a. A hierarchical analysis of 1,710 English personality-descriptive adjectives. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 87:707–21 [Google Scholar]
  13. Ashton MC, Lee K, Perugini M, Szarota P, de Vries RE et al. 2004b. A six-factor structure of personality-descriptive adjectives: solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 86:356–66 [Google Scholar]
  14. Ashton MC, Lee K, Son C. 2000. Honesty as the sixth factor of personality: correlations with Machiavellianism, primary psychopathy, and social adroitness. Eur. J. Personal. 14:359–68 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ashton MC, Paunonen SV, Helmes E, Jackson DN. 1998b. Kin altruism, reciprocal altruism, and the Big Five personality factors. Evol. Hum. Behav. 19:243–55 [Google Scholar]
  16. Averill JR. 1997. The emotions: an integrative approach. Handbook of Personality Psychology Hogan R, Johnson J, Briggs S. 513–41 San Diego: Academic [Google Scholar]
  17. Barrick MR, Mitchell TR, Stewart GL. 2003a. Situational and motivational influences on trait-behavior relationships. Personality and Work: Reconsidering the Role of Personality in Organizations Barrick MR, Ryan AM. 60–82 San Francisco: Jossey-Bass [Google Scholar]
  18. Barrick MR, Mount MK. 1991. The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta-analysis. Pers. Psychol. 44:1–26 [Google Scholar]
  19. Barrick MR, Mount MK, Gupta R. 2003b. Meta-analysis of the relationship between the Five-Factor Model of personality and Holland’s occupational types. Pers. Psychol. 56:45–74 [Google Scholar]
  20. Bauer DJ. 2011. Evaluating individual differences in psychological processes. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 20:115–18 [Google Scholar]
  21. Baumeister RF, Gailliot M, DeWall CN, Oaten M. 2006. Self-regulation and personality: how interventions increase regulatory success, and how depletion moderates the effect of traits on behavior. J. Personal. 74:1773–801 [Google Scholar]
  22. Beaty JC, Cleveland JN, Murphy KR. 2001. The relation between personality and contextual performance in “strong” versus “weak” situations. Hum. Perform. 14:125–48 [Google Scholar]
  23. Benet V, Waller NG. 1995. The Big Seven factor model of personality description: evidence for its cross-cultural generality in a Spanish sample. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 69:701–18 [Google Scholar]
  24. Berry CM, Sackett PR, Wiemann S. 2007. A review of recent developments in integrity test research. Pers. Psychol. 60:271–301 [Google Scholar]
  25. Birkland AS, Ones DS. 2006. The structure of emotional stability: a meta-analytic investigation. Presented at Int. Congr. Appl. Psychol., 26th, July 16–21, Athens, Greece
  26. Block J. 1995a. A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychol. Bull. 117:187–215 [Google Scholar]
  27. Block J. 1995b. Going beyond the five factors given: rejoinder to Costa and McCrae (1995) and Goldberg and Saucier (1995). Psychol. Bull. 117:226–29 [Google Scholar]
  28. Block J. 2001. Millennial contrarianism: the five-factor approach to personality description 5 years later. J. Res. Personal. 35:98–107 [Google Scholar]
  29. Block J, Block JH. 2006. Venturing a 30-year longitudinal study. Am. Psychol. 61:315–27 [Google Scholar]
  30. Bond MH. 1994. Trait theory and cross-cultural studies of person perception. Psychol. Inq. 5:114–17 [Google Scholar]
  31. Borman WC, White LA, Pulakos ED, Oppler SH. 1991. Models of supervisory job performance ratings. J. Appl. Psychol. 76:863–72 [Google Scholar]
  32. Browne MW. 1992. Circumplex models for correlation matrices. Psychometrika 57:469–97 [Google Scholar]
  33. Butcher JN, Rouse SV. 1996. Personality: individual differences and clinical assessment. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 47:87–111 [Google Scholar]
  34. Campbell JP. 1990. Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology Vol. 1 Dunnette MD, Hough LM. 687–732 Palo Alto, CA: Consult. Psychol., 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  35. Campbell JP, Knapp D. 2001. Project A: Exploring the Limits of Performance Improvement Through Personnel Selection and Classification Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
  36. Cattell RB. 1943. The description of personality: basic traits resolved into clusters. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 38:476–506 [Google Scholar]
  37. Cattell RB. 1945. The description of personality: principles and findings in a factor analysis. Am. J. Psychol. 58:69–90 [Google Scholar]
  38. Chan D. 2004. Individual differences in tolerance for contradiction. Hum. Perform. 17:297–324 [Google Scholar]
  39. Church AT, Burke PJ. 1994. Exploratory and confirmatory tests of the Big Five and Tellegen’s three- and four-dimensional models. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 66:93–114 [Google Scholar]
  40. Connelly BS, Davies SE, Ones DS, Birkland AS. 2008a. Agreeableness: a meta-analytic review of structure, convergence, and predictive validity. Presented at Symp.: Personality in the Workplace: Advances in Measurement and Assessment, Annu. Conf. Soc. Ind. Organ. Psychol., 23rd, Apr. 10–12, San Francisco
  41. Connelly BS, Davies SE, Ones DS, Birkland AS. 2008b. Opening up openness: a meta-analytic review of measures of the personality construct. Presented at Annu. Conf. Soc. Personal. Soc. Psychol., Feb. 7–9, Albuquerque, NM
  42. Connelly BS, Ones DS. 2007. Combining conscientiousness scales: Can’t get enough of the trait, baby. Presented at Annu. Conf. Soc. Ind. Organ. Psychol., Apr. 27–29, New York
  43. Coolidge FL, Becker LA, DiRito DC, Durham RL, Kinlaw MM, Philbrick PB. 1994. On the relationship of the Five-Factor personality model to personality disorders: four reservations. Psychol. Rep. 75:11–21 [Google Scholar]
  44. Costa PT Jr, McCrae RR. 1992a. Four ways five factors are basic. Personal. Individ. Differ. 13:653–65 [Google Scholar]
  45. Costa PT Jr, McCrae RR. 1992b. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manual Odessa, FL: Psychol. Assess. Resour. [Google Scholar]
  46. Costa PT Jr, Zonderman AB, Williams RB, McCrae RR. 1985. Content and comprehensiveness in the MMPI: an item factor analysis in a normal adult sample. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 48:925–33 [Google Scholar]
  47. Cronbach LJ. 1991. Methodological studies—a personal retrospective. Improving Inquiry in Social Science: A Volume in Honor of Lee J. Cronbach Snow RE, Wiley DE. 385–400 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
  48. Cronbach LJ, Gleser CG. 1957. Psychological Tests and Personnel Decisions Urbana: Univ. IllPress [Google Scholar]
  49. Dancer LJ, Woods SA. 2006. Higher-order factor structures and intercorrelations of the 16PF5 and FIRO-B. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 14:385–91 [Google Scholar]
  50. Davies M, Stankov L, Roberts RD. 1998. Emotional intelligence: in search of an elusive construct. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 75:989–1015 [Google Scholar]
  51. Davies SE, Connelly BS, Ones DS, Birkland AS. 2008. Enhancing the role of extraversion for work related behaviors. Presented at Annu. Conf. Soc. Ind. Organ. Psychol., 23rd, Apr. 10–12, San Francisco
  52. De Fruyt F, McCrae RR, Szirmák Z, Nagy J. 2004. The Five-Factor Personality Inventory as a measure of the Five-Factor Model: Belgian, American, and Hungarian comparisons with the NEO-PI-R. Assessment 11:207–15 [Google Scholar]
  53. De Fruyt F, Mervielde I. 1997. The Five-Factor Model of personality and Holland’s RIASEC interest types. Personal. Individ. Differ. 23:87–103 [Google Scholar]
  54. De Raad B. 1998. Five big, Big Five issues: rationale, content, structure, status and cross-cultural assessment. Eur. Psychol. 3:113–24 [Google Scholar]
  55. De Raad B, Hoskens M. 1990. Personality-descriptive nouns. Eur. J. Personal. 4:131–46 [Google Scholar]
  56. De Raad B, Perugini M, Szirmák Z. 1997. In pursuit of a cross-lingual reference structure of personality traits: comparisons among five languages. Eur. J. Personal. 11:167–85 [Google Scholar]
  57. Di Blas L, Forzi M. 1999. Refining a descriptive structure of personality attributes in the Italian language. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 76:451–81 [Google Scholar]
  58. Dudley NM, Orvis KA, Lebiecki JE, Cortina JM. 2006. A meta-analytic investigation of conscientiousness in the prediction of job performance: examining the intercorrelations and the incremental validity of narrow traits. J. Appl. Psychol. 91:40–57 [Google Scholar]
  59. Dunnette MD. 1966. Fads, fashions, and folderol in psychology. Am. Psychol. 21:343–52 [Google Scholar]
  60. Fiske DW. 1949. Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from different sources. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 44:329–44 [Google Scholar]
  61. Fleishman EA, Quaintance MK. 1984. Taxonomies of Human Performance: The Description of Human Tasks Orlando, FL: Academic [Google Scholar]
  62. Galton F. 1884. Measurement of character. Fortn. Rev. 36:179–85 [Google Scholar]
  63. Ghiselli EE. 1966. The Validity of Occupational Aptitude Tests New York: Wiley [Google Scholar]
  64. Goffin RD, Rothstein MG, Rieder MJ, Poole A, Krajewski HT et al. 2011. Choosing job-related personality traits: developing valid personality-oriented job analysis. Personal. Individ. Differ. 51:646–51 [Google Scholar]
  65. Goldberg LR. 1981. Language and individual differences: the search for universals in personality lexicons. Review of Personality and Social Psychology Vol. 2 Wheeler L. 141–65 Beverly Hills, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  66. Goldberg LR. 1990. An alternative “description of personality:” the Big Five factor structure. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 59:1216–29 [Google Scholar]
  67. Goldberg LR. 1993. The structure of phenotypic personality traits. Am. Psychol. 48:26–34 [Google Scholar]
  68. Gonzalez-Mulé E, DeGeest D, Mount MK. 2013. Power of the circumplex: incremental validity of intersection traits in predicting counterproductive work behaviors. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 21:322–27 [Google Scholar]
  69. Gough HG. 1968. The Chapin Social Insight Test Manual Palo Alto, CA: Consult. Psychol. [Google Scholar]
  70. Guion RM, Gottier RF. 1965. Validity of personality measures in personnel selection. Pers. Psychol. 18:135–64 [Google Scholar]
  71. Hodson G, Hogg SM, MacInnis CC. 2009. The role of “dark personalities” (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy), Big Five personality factors, and ideology in explaining prejudice. J. Res. Personal. 43:686–90 [Google Scholar]
  72. Hodson G, Sorrentino RM. 1999. Uncertainty orientation and the Big Five personality structure. J. Res. Personal. 33:253–61 [Google Scholar]
  73. Hofstee WKB, de Raad B, Goldberg LR. 1992. Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 63:146–63 [Google Scholar]
  74. Hogan J, Holland B. 2003. Using theory to evaluate personality and job-performance relations: a socioanalytic perspective. J. Appl. Psychol. 88:100–12 [Google Scholar]
  75. Hogan RT. 1969. Development of an empathy scale. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 33:307–16 [Google Scholar]
  76. Hogan RT. 1982. A socioanalytic theory of personality. In Proc. Neb. Symp. Motiv.: Personal.—Curr. Theory Research, pp. 55–89. Lincoln: Univ. Neb. Press
  77. Hough LM. 1986. Utility of Temperament, Biodata, and Interest Assessment for Predicting Job Performance: A Review and Integration of the Literature (ARI Res. Note 88-02). Alexandria, VA: US Army Res. Inst
  78. Hough LM. 1987. Overcoming objections to use of temperament variables in selection: demonstrating their usefulness. Presented at Symp. New Perspectives on Personality and Job Performance, Annu. Conv. Am. Psychol. Assoc., 95th, Aug., New York
  79. Hough LM. 1988. Personality assessment for selection and placement decisions. Presented at Annu. Conf. Soc. Ind. Organ. Psychol., 3rd, Apr., Dallas
  80. Hough LM. 1989. Development of personality measures to supplement selection decisions. Advances in Industrial Organizational Psychology Fallon BJ, Pfister HP, Brebner J. 365–75. Amsterdam: North-Holland [Google Scholar]
  81. Hough LM. 1992. The “Big Five” personality variables—construct confusion: description versus prediction. Hum. Perform. 5:1/2139–55 [Google Scholar]
  82. Hough LM. 1997. The millennium for personality psychology: new horizons or good old daze. Appl. Psychol.: Int. Rev 47:233–61 [Google Scholar]
  83. Hough LM. 2001. I/Owes its advances to personality. Applied Personality Psychology: The Intersection of Personality and Industrial/Organizational Psychology Roberts BW, Hogan RT. 19–44 Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc. [Google Scholar]
  84. Hough LM, Barge BN, Kamp JD. 2001. Assessment of personality, temperament, vocational interests, and work outcome preferences. Exploring the Limits in Personnel Selection and Classification Campbell JP, Knapp D. 111–54 Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
  85. Hough LM, Eaton NK, Dunnette MD, Kamp JD, McCloy RA. 1990. Criterion-related validities of personality constructs and the effect of response distortion on those validities [Monograph]. J. Appl. Psychol. 75:581–95 [Google Scholar]
  86. Hough LM, Johnson JW. 2013. Use and importance of personality variables in work settings. In Handbook of Psychology, Vol. 12: Industrial and Organizational Psychology, ed. IB Weiner, N Schmitt, S Highhouse, pp. 211–43. New York: Wiley
  87. Hough LM, Ones DS. 2001. The structure, measurement, validity, and use of personality variables in industrial, work, and organizational psychology. Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology Vol. 1 Anderson NR, Ones DS, Sinangil HK, Viswesvaran C. 233–77 London/New York: Sage [Google Scholar]
  88. Hough LM, Paullin C. 1994. Construct-oriented scale construction: the rational approach. The Biodata Handbook: Theory, Research, and Application Stokes GS, Mumford MD, Owens WA. 109–46 Palo Alto, CA: Consult. Psychol. [Google Scholar]
  89. Hough LM, Schneider RJ. 1996. Personality traits, taxonomies, and applications in organizations. Individual Differences and Behavior in Organizations Murphy K. 31–88 San Francisco: Jossey-Bass [Google Scholar]
  90. Hunter JE. 1986. Cognitive ability, cognitive aptitudes, job knowledge, and job performance. J. Vocat. Behav. 29:340–62 [Google Scholar]
  91. Jackson DN, Paunonen SV, Fraboni M, Goffin RD. 1996. A five-factor versus six-factor model of personality structure. Personal. Individ. Differ. 20:33–45 [Google Scholar]
  92. Jenkins M, Griffith R. 2004. Using personality constructs to predict performance: narrow or broad bandwidth. J. Bus. Psychol. 19:255–69 [Google Scholar]
  93. John OP. 1990. The “Big Five” factor taxonomy: dimensions of personality in the natural language and in questionnaires. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research Pervin LA. 66–100 New York: Springer-Verlag [Google Scholar]
  94. John OP, Naumann LP, Soto CJ. 2008. Paradigm shift to the integrative Big-Five trait taxonomy: history, measurement, and conceptual issues. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research John OP, Robins RW, Pervin LA. 114–58 New York: Guilford, 3rd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  95. Johnson JA, Ostendorf F. 1993. Clarification of the Five-Factor Model with the Abridged Big Five Dimensional Circumplex. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 65:563–76 [Google Scholar]
  96. Johnson JW. 2003. Toward a better understanding of the relationship between personality and individual job performance. Personality and Work: Reconsidering the Role of Personality in Organizations Barrick MR, Ryan AM. 83–120 San Francisco: Jossey-Bass [Google Scholar]
  97. Johnson JW, Carter GW. 2010. Validating synthetic validation: comparing traditional and synthetic validity coefficients. Pers. Psychol. 63:755–95 [Google Scholar]
  98. Johnson JW, Steel P, Scherbaum CA, Hoffman CC, Jeanneret PR, Foster J. 2010. Validation is like motor oil: Synthetic is better. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 3:305–28 [Google Scholar]
  99. Kamp JD, Gough HG. 1986. The Big Five personality factors from an assessment context. Presented at Annu. Conv. Am. Psychol. Assoc., 94th, Aug. 22–26, Washington, DC
  100. Kamp JD, Hough LM. 1986. Utility of personality assessment: a review and integration of the literature. See Hough 1986, pp. 1–90
  101. Kanfer R, Ackerman PL. 2004. Aging, adult development, and work motivation. Acad. Manag. Rev. 29:440–58 [Google Scholar]
  102. Keng SL, Smoski MJ, Robins CJ. 2011. Effects of mindfulness on psychological health: a review of empirical studies. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 31:1041–56 [Google Scholar]
  103. Kwong JYY, Cheung FM. 2003. Prediction of performance facets using specific personality traits in the Chinese context. J. Vocat. Behav. 63:99–110 [Google Scholar]
  104. Larson LM, Rottinghaus PJ, Borgen FH. 2002. Meta-analyses of Big Six interests and Big Five personality factors. J. Vocat. Behav. 61:217–39 [Google Scholar]
  105. Lee K, Ashton MC. 2005. Psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism in the Five-Factor Model and the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personal. Individ. Differ. 38:1571–82 [Google Scholar]
  106. Lee K, Ashton MC. 2008. The HEXACO personality factors in the indigenous personality lexicons of English and 11 other languages. J. Personal. 76:1001–53 [Google Scholar]
  107. Lee K, Ashton MC. 2009. Reanalysis of the structure of the Greek personality lexicon. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol 40:693–700 [Google Scholar]
  108. Lee K, Ashton MC, de Vries RE. 2005a. Predicting workplace delinquency and integrity with the HEXACO and Five-Factor models of personality structure. Hum. Perform. 18:179–97 [Google Scholar]
  109. Lee K, Ashton MC, Morrison DL, Cordery J, Dunlop PD. 2006. An overview of the HEXACO model of personality structure and the HEXACO personality inventory. Presented at Annu. Conf. Soc. Ind. Organ. Psychol., 21st, May 5–7, Dallas
  110. Lee K, Gizzarone M, Ashton MC. 2003. Personality and the likelihood to sexually harass. Sex Roles 49:59–69 [Google Scholar]
  111. Lee K, Ogunfowora B, Ashton MC. 2005b. Personality traits beyond the Big Five: Are they within the HEXACO space?. J. Personal. 73:1437–63 [Google Scholar]
  112. LePine JA, Colquitt JA, Erez A. 2000. Adaptability to changing task contexts: effects of general cognitive ability, conscientiousness, and openness to experience. Pers. Psychol. 53:563–93 [Google Scholar]
  113. Livesley WJ, Jackson DN, Schroeder ML. 1989. A study of the factorial structure of personality pathology. J. Personal. Disord. 3:292–306 [Google Scholar]
  114. Livesley WJ, Jackson DN, Schroeder ML. 1992. Factorial structure of traits delineating personality disorders in clinical and general populations samples. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 101:432–40 [Google Scholar]
  115. Loehlin JC, Goldberg LR. 2014. Do personality traits conform to lists or hierarchies?. Personal. Individ. Differ. 70:51–56 [Google Scholar]
  116. McCrae RR, Costa PT Jr. 1997. Personality trait structure as a human universal. Am. Psychol. 52:509–16 [Google Scholar]
  117. McCrae RR, Costa PT Jr, Del Pilar GH, Rolland JP, Parker WD. 1998. Cross-cultural assessment of the Five-Factor Model: the revised NEO Personality Inventory. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 29:171–88 [Google Scholar]
  118. McHenry JJ, Hough LM, Toquam JL, Hanson MA, Ashworth S. 1990. Project A validity results: the relationship between predictor and criterion domains. Pers. Psychol. 43:335–54 [Google Scholar]
  119. Mershon B, Gorsuch RL. 1988. Number of factors in the personality sphere: Does increase in factors increase predictability of real life criteria?. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 55:675–80 [Google Scholar]
  120. Moon H, Hollenbeck JR, Marinova S, Humphrey SE. 2008. Beneath the surface: uncovering the relationship between extraversion and organizational citizenship behavior through a facet approach. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 16:143–54 [Google Scholar]
  121. Motowidlo SJ, Borman WC, Schmit MJ. 1997. A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance. Hum. Perform. 10:71–83 [Google Scholar]
  122. Norman WT. 1963. Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 66:574–83 [Google Scholar]
  123. O’Brien E, LaHuis DM. 2011. Do applicants and incumbents respond to personality items similarly? A comparison of dominance and ideal point response models. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 19:109–18 [Google Scholar]
  124. O’Neill TA, Hastings SE. 2010. Explaining workplace deviance behavior with more than just the “Big Five.”. Personal. Individ. Differ. 50:268–73 [Google Scholar]
  125. Ones DS, Viswesvaran C. 1996. What do pre-employment customer service scales measure? Explorations in construct validity and implications for personnel selection. Presented at Annu. Conf. Soc. Ind. Organ. Psychol., 11th, Apr. 26–28, San Diego
  126. Ones DS, Viswesvaran C. 1998. Integrity testing in organizations. In Dysfunctional Behavior in Organizations: Vol. 2: Nonviolent Behaviors in Organizations, ed. RW Griffin, A O’Leary-Kelly, JM Collins, pp. 243–76. Greenwich, CT: JAI
  127. Ones DS, Viswesvaran C, Schmidt FL. 1993. Comprehensive meta-analysis of integrity test validities: findings and implications for personnel selection and theories of job performance [Monograph]. J. Appl. Psychol. 78:679–703 [Google Scholar]
  128. Oswald FL, Hough LM. 2011. Personality and its assessment in organizations: theoretical and empirical developments. In APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 2: Selecting and Developing Members for the Organization, ed. S Zedeck, pp. 153–84. Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc
  129. Oswald FL, Hough LM, Ock J. 2013. Theoretical and empirical structures of personality: implications for measurement, modeling and prediction. Handbook of Personality at Work Christiansen ND, Tett RP. 11–29 New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  130. Paunonen SV, Ashton MC. 2001a. Big Five and facets and the prediction of behavior. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 81:524–39 [Google Scholar]
  131. Paunonen SV, Ashton MC. 2001b. Big Five predictors of academic achievement. J. Res. Personal. 35:78–90 [Google Scholar]
  132. Paunonen SV, Ashton MC. 2013. On the prediction of academic performance with personality traits: a replication study. J. Res. Personal. 47:778–81 [Google Scholar]
  133. Paunonen SV, Haddock G, Forsterling F, Keinonen M. 2003. Broad versus narrow personality measures and the prediction of behavior across cultures. Eur. J. Personal. 17:413–33 [Google Scholar]
  134. Paunonen SV, Jackson DN. 1996. The Jackson Personality Inventory and the Five-Factor Model of personality. J. Res. Personal. 30:42–59 [Google Scholar]
  135. Paunonen SV, Jackson DN. 2000. What is beyond the Big Five? Plenty!. J. Personal. 68:821–35 [Google Scholar]
  136. Paunonen SV, Jackson DN, Trzebinski J, Forsterling F. 1992. Personality structure across cultures: a multimethod evaluation. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 62:447–56 [Google Scholar]
  137. Paunonen SV, Lönnqvist J, Verkasalo M, Leikas S, Nissinen V. 2006. Narcissism and emergent leadership in military cadets. Leadersh. Q. 17:475–86 [Google Scholar]
  138. Paunonen SV, Nicol AAAM. 2001. The personality hierarchy and the prediction of work behaviors. Personality Psychology in the Workplace Roberts BW, Hogan RT. 161–91 Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc. [Google Scholar]
  139. Paunonen SV, Rothstein MG, Jackson DN. 1999. Narrow reasoning about the use of broad personality measures for personnel selection. J. Organ. Behav. 20:389–405 [Google Scholar]
  140. Pearlman K. 1985. Validity generalization: from theory to application. Presented at Cent. Hum. Resour. Progr., Inst. Ind. Relat., Univ. Calif. Berkeley
  141. Plutchik R. 1997. The circumplex as a general model of the structure of emotions and personality. Circumplex Models of Personality and Emotions Plutchik R, Conte HR. 17–45 Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc. [Google Scholar]
  142. Putka DJ, Sackett PR. 2010. Reliability and validity. Handbook of Employee Selection Farr JL, Tippins NT. 9–49 New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  143. Roberts BW, Bogg T, Walton K, Chernyshenko O, Stark SE. 2004. A lexical investigation of the lower-order structure of conscientiousness. J. Res. Personal. 38:164–78 [Google Scholar]
  144. Roberts BW, Chernyshenko OS, Stark S, Goldberg LR. 2005. The structure of conscientiousness: an empirical investigation based on seven major personality questionnaires. Pers. Psychol. 58:103–39 [Google Scholar]
  145. Sanz J, Gil F, García-Vera MP, Barrasa A. 2008. Needs and cognition/behavior patterns at work and the Big Five: an assessment of the Personality and Preference Inventory-Normative (PAPI-N) from the perspective of the Five-Factor Model. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 16:46–58 [Google Scholar]
  146. Saucier G. 1997. Effects of variable selection on the factor structure of person descriptors. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 73:1296–312 [Google Scholar]
  147. Saucier G. 2009. Recurrent personality dimensions in inclusive lexical studies: indications for a Big Six structure. J. Personal. 77:1577–614 [Google Scholar]
  148. Saucier G, Georgiades S, Tsaousis I, Goldberg LR. 2005. The factor structure of Greek personality adjectives. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 88:856–75 [Google Scholar]
  149. Saucier G, Goldberg LR. 1998. What is beyond the Big Five?. J. Personal. 66:495–524 [Google Scholar]
  150. Saucier G, Ostendorf F. 1999. Hierarchical subcomponents of the Big Five personality factors: a cross-language replication. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 76:613–27 [Google Scholar]
  151. Scerri ER. 2006. The periodic table: its story and its significance. New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  152. Scherbaum CA. 2005. Synthetic validity: past, present, and future. Pers. Psychol. 58:481–515 [Google Scholar]
  153. Schmidt FL, Hunter JE. 1992. Development of a causal model of processes determining job performance. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 1:89–92 [Google Scholar]
  154. Schmidt FL, Hunter JE, Outerbridge AN. 1986. Impact of job experience and ability on job knowledge, work sample performance, and supervisory ratings of job performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 71:432–39 [Google Scholar]
  155. Schmitt N, Gooding RZ, Noe RA, Kirsch M. 1984. Metaanalyses of validity studies published between 1964 and 1982 and the investigation of study characteristics. Pers. Psychol. 37:407–22 [Google Scholar]
  156. Schneider RJ, Ackerman PL, Kanfer R. 1996. To ‘act wisely in human relations’: exploring the dimensions of social competence. Personal. Individ. Differ. 21:469–81 [Google Scholar]
  157. Schneider RJ, Hough LM. 1995. Personality and industrial/organizational psychology. Int. Rev. Ind./Organ. Psychol 10:75–130 [Google Scholar]
  158. Schroeder ML, Wormworth JA, Livesley WJ. 1992. Dimensions of personality disorder and their relationship to the Big Five. Psychol. Assess. 4:47–53 [Google Scholar]
  159. Soto CJ, John OP. 2009. Using the California Psychological Inventory to assess the Big Five personality domains: a hierarchical approach. J. Res. Personal. 43:25–38 [Google Scholar]
  160. Steel PDG, Huffcutt AI, Kammeyer-Mueller J. 2006. From the work one knows the worker: a systematic review of the challenges, solutions, and steps to creating synthetic validity. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 14:16–36 [Google Scholar]
  161. Stewart G. 1999. Trait bandwidth and stages of job performance: assessing differential effects for conscientiousness and its subtraits. J. Appl. Psychol. 84:959–68 [Google Scholar]
  162. Stewart WH Jr, Roth PL. 2001. Risk propensity differences between entrepreneurs and managers: a meta-analytic review. J. Appl. Psychol. 86:145–53 [Google Scholar]
  163. Szarota P, Ashton MC, Lee K. 2007. Taxonomy and structure of the Polish personality lexicon. Eur. J. Personal. 21:823–52 [Google Scholar]
  164. Tellegen A, Waller NG. 1987. Re-examining basic dimensions of natural language trait descriptors. Presented at Annu. Conv. of Am. Psychol. Assoc., 95th, Aug., New York
  165. Tett RP, Burnett DD. 2003. A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 88:500–17 [Google Scholar]
  166. Tett RP, Steele JR, Beauregard RS. 2003. Broad and narrow measures on both sides of the personality-job performance relationship. J. Organ. Behav. 24:335–56 [Google Scholar]
  167. Tokar DM, Fischer AR, Snell AF, Harik-Williams N. 1999. Efficient assessment of the Five-Factor Model of personality: structural validity analyses of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (Form S). Meas. Eval. Couns. Dev. 32:14–30 [Google Scholar]
  168. Tupes EC, Christal RE. 1961. Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings. USAF Tech. Rep. No. 61-97, United States Air Force, Lackland Air Force Base, TX
  169. Tupes EC, Christal RE. 1992. Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings. J. Personal. 60:225–51 [Google Scholar]
  170. Van Iddekinge CH, Taylor MA, Eidson CE Jr. 2005. Broad versus narrow facets of integrity: predictive validity and subgroup differences. Hum. Perform. 18:151–77 [Google Scholar]
  171. Vandenberg RJ, Lance CE. 2000. A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organ. Res. Methods 3:4–70 [Google Scholar]
  172. Vasilopoulos NL, Cucina JM, Hunter AE. 2007. Personality and training proficiency: issues of bandwidth-fidelity and curvilinearity. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 80:109–31 [Google Scholar]
  173. Vinchur AJ, Schippmann JS, Switzer FS, Roth PL. 1998. A meta-analytic review of predictors of job performance for salespeople. J. Appl. Psychol. 83:586–97 [Google Scholar]
  174. Waller NG, Ben-Porath YS. 1987. Is it time for clinical psychology to embrace the Five-Factor Model of personality?. Am. Psychol. 42:887–89 [Google Scholar]
  175. Waller NG, Zavala JD. 1993. Evaluating the Big Five. Psychol. Inq. 4:131–34 [Google Scholar]
  176. Warr P, Bartram D, Martin T. 2005. Personality and sales performance: situational variation and interactions between traits. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 13:87–91 [Google Scholar]
  177. Wasti SA, Lee K, Ashton MC, Somer O. 2008. Six Turkish personality factors and the HEXACO model of personality structure. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 39:665–84 [Google Scholar]
  178. Woo SE, Chernyshenko OS, Longley A, Zhang ZX, Chiu CY, Stark SE. 2014a. Openness to experience: its lower level structure, measurement, and cross-cultural equivalence. J. Personal. Assess. 96:29–45 [Google Scholar]
  179. Woo SE, Chernyshenko OS, Stark SE, Conz G. 2014b. Validity of six openness facets in predicting work behaviors: a meta-analysis. J. Personal. Assess. 96:76–86 [Google Scholar]
  180. Yeo G, Neal A. 2008. Subjective cognitive effort: a model of states, traits, and time. J. Appl. Psychol. 93:617–31 [Google Scholar]
  181. Zuckerman M, Kuhlman DM, Camac C. 1988. What lies beyond E and N? Factor analyses of scales believed to measure basic dimensions of personality. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 54:96–107 [Google Scholar]
  182. Zuckerman M, Kuhlman DM, Joireman J, Teta P, Kraft M. 1993. A comparison of three structural models for personality: the Big Three, the Big Five, and the Alternative Five. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 65:757–68 [Google Scholar]
  183. Zuckerman M, Kuhlman DM, Thornquist M, Kiers H. 1991. Five (or three) robust questionnaire scale factors of personality without culture. Personal. Individ. Differ. 9:929–41 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error