Reflections on a Career Studying Individual Differences in the Workplace

Literature Cited

1. Barrick MR, Mount MK. 1991. The Big 5 personality dimensions and job-performance: a meta-analysis. Pers. Psychol. 44:1–26
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bennett RJ, Robinson SL. 2000. Development of a measure of workplace deviance. J. Appl. Psychol. 85:3349–60
   [Google Scholar]
3. Bobko P, Roth PL, Potosky D 1999. Derivation and implications of a meta‐analytic matrix incorporating cognitive ability, alternative predictors, and job performance. Pers. Psychol. 52:3561–89
   [Google Scholar]
4. Campbell JP, McCloy RA, Oppler SH, Sager CE 1993. A theory of performance. Pers. Sel. Organ. 3570:35–70
   [Google Scholar]
5. Campbell JP, McHenry JJ, Wise LL 1990. Modeling job performance in a population of jobs. Pers. Psychol. 43:2313–575
   [Google Scholar]
6. Campbell JP, Wilmot MP. 2015. The functioning of theory in industrial, work and organizational psychology (IWOP). The SAGE Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 1: Personnel Psychology and Employee Performance DS Ones, N Anderson, C Viswesvaran, HK Sinangil 3–37 London: Sage http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781473914940.n2
   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
7. Cao M, Drasgow F. 2019. Does forcing reduce faking? A meta-analytic review of forced-choice personality measures in high-stakes situations. J. Appl. Psychol. 104:1347–68
   [Google Scholar]
8. Cleary TA. 1968. Test bias: prediction of grades of Negro and white students in integrated colleges. J. Educ. Meas. 5:2115–24
   [Google Scholar]
9. Dahlke JA, Sackett PR. 2017. The relationship between cognitive-ability saturation and subgroup differences across predictors of job performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 102:1403–20
   [Google Scholar]
10. Dahlke JA, Sackett PR. 2018. Refinements to the d_Mod class of categorical-moderation effect sizes. Organ. Res. Methods 21:226–34
    [Google Scholar]
11. DeCorte W, Sackett PR, Lievens F 2011. Designing Pareto-optimal selection systems: formalizing the decisions required for selection system development. J. Appl. Psychol. 96:907–20
    [Google Scholar]
12. DeYoung CG, Quilty LC, Peterson JB 2007. Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. J. Person. Soc. Psychol. 93:5880–96
    [Google Scholar]
13. Drasgow F, Stark S, Chernyshenko OS, Nye CD, Hulin CL, White LA 2012. Development of the Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System (TAPAS) to Support Army Selection and Classification Decisions Fort Belvoir, VA: US Army Res. Inst. Behav. Soc. Sci.
14. 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]
15. Ellingson JE, Sackett PR, Hough L 1999. Social desirability corrections in personality measurement: issues of applicant comparison and construct validity. J. Appl. Psychol. 84:155–66
    [Google Scholar]
16. Gonzalez-Mulé E, Mount MK, Oh IS 2014. A meta-analysis of the relationship between general mental ability and nontask performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 99:61222–43
    [Google Scholar]
17. Guion RM. 1965. Personnel Testing New York: McGraw-Hill
18. Guion RM. 1976. Recruiting, selection, and job placement. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology MD Dunnette 777–828 Chicago: Rand McNally College Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Guion RM, Gottier RF. 1965. Validity of personality measures in personnel selection. Pers. Psychol. 18:135–64
    [Google Scholar]
20. Judge TA, Rodell JB, Klinger RL, Simon LS, Crawford ER 2013. Hierarchical representations of the five-factor model of personality in predicting job performance: integrating three organizing frameworks with two theoretical perspectives. J. Appl. Psychol. 98:875–925
    [Google Scholar]
21. Keiser H, Sackett PR, Kuncel NR, Brothen T 2016. Why women do better in college than admission scores would predict: exploring the roles of conscientiousness and course-taking patterns. J. Appl. Psychol. 101:569–81
    [Google Scholar]
22. Kuncel NR, Borneman M, Kiger T 2012. Innovative item response process and Bayesian faking detection methods: more questions than answers. See Ziegler et al. 2012 102–12
23. Kuncel NR, Sackett PR. 2014. Resolving the assessment center construct validity dilemma (as we know it). J. Appl. Psychol. 99:38–47
    [Google Scholar]
24. Lievens F, Buyse T, Sackett PR 2005. The operational validity of a video-based situational judgment test for medical school admissions: illustrating the importance of matching predictor and criterion construct domains. J. Appl. Psychol. 90:442–52
    [Google Scholar]
25. Mischel W. 1968. Personality and Assessment New York: Wiley
26. Morgeson FP, Campion MA, Dipboye RL, Hollenbeck JR, Murphy K, Schmitt N 2007. Reconsidering the use of personality tests in personnel selection contexts. Pers. Psychol. 60:3683–729
    [Google Scholar]
27. Nye CD, Sackett PR. 2017. New effect sizes for tests of categorical moderation and differential prediction. Organ. Res. Methods 20:639–64
    [Google Scholar]
28. 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. J. Appl. Psychol. 78:4679–703
    [Google Scholar]
29. Organ DW, Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SP 2006. Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature, Antecedents, and Consequences London: Sage
30. Pace VL, Brannick MT. 2010. How similar are personality scales of the “same” construct? A meta-analytic investigation. Personal. Individ. Differ. 49:7669–76
    [Google Scholar]
31. Rotundo M, Sackett PR. 2002. The relative importance of task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance to global ratings of job performance: a policy-capturing approach. J. Appl. Psychol. 87:66–80
    [Google Scholar]
32. Sackett PR. 2002. The structure of counterproductive work behaviors: dimensionality and relationships with facets of job performance. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 10:5–11
    [Google Scholar]
33. Sackett PR. 2003. The status of validity generalization research: key issues in drawing inferences from cumulative research findings. Validity Generalization: A Critical Review KR Murphy 91–114 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
    [Google Scholar]
34. Sackett PR. 2012. Faking in personality assessments: Where do we stand?. See Ziegler et al. 2012 330–44
35. Sackett PR, Borneman MJ, Connelly BS 2007. High stakes testing in higher education and employment: appraising the evidence for validity and fairness. Am. Psychol. 63:215–27
    [Google Scholar]
36. Sackett PR, DeVore CJ. 2001. Counterproductive behaviors at work. International Handbook of Work Psychology N Anderson, D Ones, H Sinangil, C Viswesvaran 145–64 London: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
37. Sackett PR, Dreher GF. 1982. Constructs and assessment center dimensions: some troubling empirical findings. J. Appl. Psychol. 67:401–10
    [Google Scholar]
38. Sackett PR, Ellingson JE. 1997. On the effects of forming multi-predictor composites on group differences and adverse impact. Pers. Psychol. 50:708–21
    [Google Scholar]
39. Sackett PR, Laczo RM, Lippe ZP 2003. Differential prediction and the use of multiple predictors: the omitted variables problem. J. Appl. Psychol. 88:1046–56
    [Google Scholar]
40. Sackett PR, Lievens F, Van Iddekinge CH, Kuncel NR 2017a. Individual differences and their measurement: 100 years of research in the Journal of Applied Psychology. J. Appl. Psychol 102:254–73
    [Google Scholar]
41. Sackett PR, Schmitt N, Ellingson JE, Kabin MB 2001. High-stakes testing in employment, credentialing, and higher education: prospects in a post-affirmative-action world. Am. Psychol. 56:302–18
    [Google Scholar]
42. Sackett PR, Shewach OR, Keiser HN 2017b. Assessment centers versus cognitive ability tests: challenging the conventional wisdom on criterion-related validity. J. Appl. Psychol. 102:1435–47
    [Google Scholar]
43. Sackett PR, Wilk SL. 1994. Within-group norming and other forms of score adjustment in preemployment testing. Am. Psychol. 49:929–54
    [Google Scholar]
44. Sackett PR, Zedeck S, Fogli L 1988. Relations between measures of typical and maximum performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 73:482–86
    [Google Scholar]
45. Schmidt FL, Hunter JE. 1977. Development of a general solution to the problem of validity generalization. J. Appl. Psychol. 62:5529–40
    [Google Scholar]
46. Schmidt FL, Hunter JE. 1998. The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychol. Bull. 124:2262–74
    [Google Scholar]
47. Soc. Ind. Organ. Psychol. (SIOP). 2018. Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection procedures. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 11:S11–97
    [Google Scholar]
48. Tomeh D, Sackett PR. 2019. Revisiting ability test versus interview validity using head-to-head comparisons Paper presented at the 34th Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology Washington, DC:April 4–6
49. Walmsley PT, Sackett PR. 2013. Factors affecting potential personality retest improvement after initial failure. Hum. Perform. 26:390–408
    [Google Scholar]
50. Williams LJ, Anderson SE. 1991. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. J. Manag. 17:601–17
    [Google Scholar]
51. Wilmot MP, Wanberg CR, Kammeyer-Mueller JD, Ones DS 2019. Extraversion advantages at work: a quantitative review and synthesis of the meta-analytic evidence. J. Appl. Psychol. 104:1447–70
    [Google Scholar]
52. Ziegler M, MacCann C, Roberts RD 2012. New Perspectives on Faking in Personality Assessment New York: Oxford Univ. Press