The Validity of Verifiable and Non-Verifiable Biodata Items: An Examination Across Applicants and Incumbents

This study examines the influence of item verifiability (non-verifiable vs. verifiable), context (applicant vs. incumbent), and keying procedure on biodata mean test scores and validity. Concurrent and predictive validation studies were conducted using a sample of 425 call center incumbents and a sample of 410 call center applicants. Although applicants did not obtain significantly higher mean biodata scores, results provide support for the hypothesis that the non-verifiable biodata composite would be less valid in the applicant context, while the verifiable biodata composite would be equally valid across both the applicant and incumbent contexts. The same pattern of results was obtained using both item- and option-keying procedures. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

[1]  P. W. Thayer.  “SOMETHINGS OLD, SOMETHINGS NEW” , 1977 .

[2]  J. Hunter,et al.  Validity and Utility of Alternative Predictors of Job Performance , 1984 .

[3]  Ronald D. Pannone.  PREDICTING TEST PERFORMANCE: A CONTENT VALID APPROACH TO SCREENING APPLICANTS , 1984 .

[4]  A. Kluger,et al.  Faking Biodata Tests Are Option-Keyed Instruments More Resistant? , 1991 .

[5]  Fred A. Mael.  A CONCEPTUAL RATIONALE FOR THE DOMAIN AND ATTRIBUTES OF BIODATA ITEMS , 2006 .

[6]  Michael D. Mumford,et al.  Methodology Review: Principles, Procedures, and Findings in the Application of Background Data Measures , 1987 .

[7]  Robert M. Guion,et al.  Assessment, Measurement, and Prediction for Personnel Decisions , 1997 .

[8]  R. Reilly,et al.  VALIDITY AND FAIRNESS OF SOME ALTERNATIVE EMPLOYEE SELECTION PROCEDURES , 1982 .

[9]  L. Hough.  Effects of Intentional Distortion in Personality Measurement and evaluation of Suggested Palliatives , 1998 .

[10]  Kevin D. Carlson,et al.  GENERALIZABLE BIOGRAPHICAL DATA VALIDITY CAN BE ACHIEVED WITHOUT MULTI-ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND KEYING , 1999 .

[11]  Newell K. Eaton,et al.  Criterion-related validities of personality constructs and the effect of response distortion on those validities , 1990 .

[12]  F. Schmidt,et al.  The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. , 1998 .

[13]  Frank L. Schmidt,et al.  Biographical Data in Employment Selection: Can Validities Be Made Generalizable? , 1990 .

[14]  Joseph G. Rosse,et al.  The impact of response distortion on preemployment personality testing and hiring decisions. , 1998 .

[15]  W. Borman,et al.  Expanding the Criterion Domain to Include Elements of Contextual Performance , 1993 .

[16]  Jeffrey M. Cucina,et al.  Do warnings of response verification moderate the relationship between personality and cognitive ability? , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[17]  Delroy L. Paulhus,et al.  Self-Deception and Impression Management in Test Responses , 1986 .

[18]  R. Doll.  Item Susceptibility to Attempted Faking as Related to Item Characteristic and Adopted Fake Set , 1971 .

[19]  G. Stokes,et al.  COMPARABILITY OF INCUMBENT AND APPLICANT SAMPLES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF BIODATA KEYS: THE INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL DESIRABILITY , 1993 .

[20]  D. Marrero,et al.  Some Things Old, Some Things New , 1997, Diabetes Care.

[21]  Deborah L. Whetzel,et al.  Applied measurement methods in industrial psychology , 1997 .

[22]  M. Mumford,et al.  Developmental determinants of individual action: Theory and practice in applying background measures. , 1992 .

[23]  John P. Campbell,et al.  Exploring the Limits in Personnel Selection and Classification , 2001 .

[24]  J. L. Warner,et al.  Inflation bias in self-assessment examinations: Implications for valid employee selection. , 1984 .

[25]  Wayne F. Cascio,et al.  Applied Psychology in Human Resource Management , 1998 .

[26]  Thomas E. Becker,et al.  Potential versus actual faking of a biodata form: An analysis along several dimensions of item type. , 2006 .

[27]  Fritz Drasgow,et al.  Detecting Faking on a Personality Instrument Using Appropriateness Measurement , 1996 .

[28]  Reagan D. Brown,et al.  Individual Differences in Faking Integrity Tests , 2002, Psychological reports.

[29]  Michael P. Kirsch,et al.  METAANALYSES OF VALIDITY STUDIES PUBLISHED BETWEEN 1964 AND 1982 AND THE INVESTIGATION OF STUDY CHARACTERISTICS , 1984 .

[30]  Leonard A. White,et al.  ABLE implementation issues and related research. , 2001 .

[31]  Ann Marie Ryan,et al.  The Big Five in Personnel Selection: Factor Structure in Applicant and Nonapplicant Populations , 1993 .

[32]  S. Klein,et al.  Faking of a scored life history blank as a function of criterion objectivity. , 1965, The Journal of applied psychology.

[33]  R. Reiter‐Palmon,et al.  Item selection counts: a comparison of empirical key and rational scale validities in theory-based and non-theory-based item pools. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[34]  A. Kluger,et al.  Faking Biodata Tests Are Option-Keyed Instruments More Resistant ? , 2000 .

[35]  Mohammad Muzahid Akbar,et al.  ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR: ITS NATURE AND ANTECEDENTS , 2004 .

[36]  Michael A. McDaniel,et al.  Biodata Validity Decay and Score Inflation with Faking: Do Item Attributes Explain Variance Across Items? , 2002 .

[37]  A. Ryan,et al.  Variance in faking across noncognitive measures. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.