Abstract

Personality measures are popular and useful in employment selection and academic contexts; however, concerns have been voiced regarding the strength of their association with desirable criteria. Contextualization (i.e., modifying measures to reflect the desired frame of reference, like work or school) has emerged as a promising option. Research has demonstrated that contextualizing personality measures increases predictive validity and enhances participants' perceptions of the assessments. However, few studies have compared contextualization methods to one another and, to date, only one study has compared the two most common forms of contextualization (i.e., instruction and tag contextualization), returning inconsistent findings. In a within-person, multi-wave study using a working sample (N = 399), we compared the relative efficacy of personality measures that are contextualized through manipulating the instructions and those contextualized through the addition of contextual item tags. We specifically contextualized the big five personality factors in order to predict work-related outcomes (i.e., job satisfaction, perpetrated incivility, job performance, creative job performance, and emotional exhaustion). Our study supports the use of tag-level contextualization and provides guidance on how to best implement contextual tags. Best practices, implications, and future research directions are discussed.

Department(s)

Psychological Science

Keywords and Phrases

Big five; Contextualization; Criterion-related validity; Frame-of-reference effect; Personality

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)

1573-353X; 0889-3268

Document Type

Article - Journal

Document Version

Citation

File Type

text

Language(s)

English

Rights

© 2024 Springer, All rights reserved.

Publication Date

01 Jan 2024

Download

Full Text Link

Included in

Psychology Commons

Share

 
COinS