Hierarchical representations of the five-factor model of personality in predicting job performance: integrating three organizing frameworks with two theoretical perspectives.

Integrating 2 theoretical perspectives on predictor-criterion relationships, the present study developed and tested a hierarchical framework in which each five-factor model (FFM) personality trait comprises 2 DeYoung, Quilty, and Peterson (2007) facets, which in turn comprise 6 Costa and McCrae (1992) NEO facets. Both theoretical perspectives-the bandwidth-fidelity dilemma and construct correspondence-suggest that lower order traits would better predict facets of job performance (task performance and contextual performance). They differ, however, as to the relative merits of broad and narrow traits in predicting a broad criterion (overall job performance). We first meta-analyzed the relationship of the 30 NEO facets to overall job performance and its facets. Overall, 1,176 correlations from 410 independent samples (combined N = 406,029) were coded and meta-analyzed. We then formed the 10 DeYoung et al. facets from the NEO facets, and 5 broad traits from those facets. Overall, results provided support for the 6-2-1 framework in general and the importance of the NEO facets in particular.

Are we really measuring what we say we're measuring? Using video techniques to supplement traditional construct validation procedures.

Several researchers have persuasively argued that the most important evidence to consider when assessing construct validity is whether variations in the construct of interest cause corresponding variations in the measures of the focal construct. Unfortunately, the literature provides little practical guidance on how researchers can go about testing this. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to describe how researchers can use video techniques to test whether their scales measure what they purport to measure. First, we discuss how researchers can develop valid manipulations of the focal construct that they hope to measure. Next, we explain how to design a study to use this manipulation to test the validity of the scale. Finally, comparing and contrasting traditional and contemporary perspectives on validation, we discuss the advantages and limitations of video-based validation procedures.

Time is on my side: time, general mental ability, human capital, and extrinsic career success.

The present study linked general mental ability (GMA) to extrinsic career success using a multilevel framework that included time and 3 possible time-based mediators of the GMA-career success relationship. Results, based on a large national sample, revealed that over a 28-year period, GMA affected growth in 2 indicators of extrinsic career success (income and occupational prestige), such that the careers of high-GMA individuals ascended more steeply over time than those of low-GMA individuals. Part of the reason high-GMA individuals had steeper growth in extrinsic success over time was because they attained more education, completed more job training, and gravitated toward more complex jobs. GMA also moderated the degree to which within-individual variation in the mediating variables affected within-individual variation in extrinsic career success over time: Education, training, and job complexity were much more likely to translate into career success for more intelligent individuals.