Use of Psychometric Tests in Selection - Essay Example

of Why in spite of their many positive features, are there still concerns about the use of psychometric tests in selection' 1. Introduction This paper seeks to analyse and discuss about the reasons why in spite of their many positive features, there are still concerns about the use of psychometric tests in selection. The paper therefore will to identify the positive features and associated concern with the use of psychometric tests. 2.1 What are the positive features of psychometric tests' There are benefits of psychometric tests as proven by the fact that human resource management function1 is still one of the most critical parts of management. To choose an employee who will be most productive in the organization is always an outstanding need for companies. Management therefore faces the risks of not hiring the proper person and it would just be a waste of resources to have hired people who will not be contributing to attainment of the goal of the organization. It is not only in hiring that the psychometric tests are needed. It must be pointed out that the moment that a hiring decision is, there are employee development decisions and process must be done2. 2.2 What are the possible concerns' Being aid to employee selection and development decisions and processes, psychometric tests could not just be administered nor delegated to anybody as there are costs and risks that are involved in the decisions. In the same way that employees' submitted credentials must be verified for authenticity and reliability, psychometric tests are to be evaluated also in terms of validity and reliability of the test. It may be asked whether it is possible to the have most effective way to evaluate the reliability and validity of any assessment tests so to help the decision maker know exactly how to find the right productive people with certainty and predictability without any catastrophe in hiring any wrong people who simply look good. PsyAsia International (2007) cited a Hong Kong website of an employee testing system that with worldwide claim that testing the people one knows very well will allow one to know which assessment test can be valid and reliable to use. PsyAsia International heavily the claim as to show need for understanding the real essence of test of validity and reliability.3 May the objective of validity for psychometric tests be done self-completing it and and/or asking somebody they know well to do likewise' PsyAsia International responded that the obvious assumption is that we know ourselves well and so if the test report provides an accurate reflection of the self that we know, it "must" be valid." 4Using research as basis of criticism, PsyAsia International5 did expose how defective such assessments of test reports by individuals. It therefore cited a study where human resource professionals attending a conference were asked to complete a personality test. After the personality test, the same professionals were given a randomly generated narrative report but said participants were NOT told that it had been randomly generated and they were asked to evaluate its accuracy. What came out was that 90% of the respondents agreed that the report was either amazingly accurate or very accurate. Were the participants really good in evaluating the accuracy' Or, could it imply that what was randomly selected has the great probability that the result of the test has a statistically significant basis and therefore must be reliable' It would seem from the above result of research that it was indeed easy to have known that 90% of respondents agreed, but how accurate are the respondents' report' PsyAsia International reminded of suggestions made by various worldwide psychological societies and academics to assess at least 4 types of validity when evaluating tests.6 In the same context then, PsyAsia International described explained that the term validity to refer to whether or not the test is fit for purpose, which could be ascertained by asking the question: "Does it measure what it is supposed to measure or can it predict something that is meaningful, such as performance'"7 2.2.1 Important aspects of test validity PsyAsia International cited and described the important aspects of test validity as follows: The first one is face validity which could be determined by simply asking if the questions in the test look like they are measuring what the test purports to measure.8 Claim of test that measures with numerical reasoning must necessarily have any numerical data in the questions, or else one could doubt if the test has really attained face validity. Given that this type of validity is somewhat subjective, it is it can only be deemed to have the lowest level of validity.9 The second is content validity, where there is the need to know "whether the test questions are sufficiently representative of all of the possible questions that could assess the construct we are interested in." 10. To illustrate, if one desires to assess conscientiousness, but his or her test simply asks questions that relate to your preference for following rules which is only one aspect of conscientiousness, them such test is unlikely to have attained content validity11. The third aspect is construct validity. This may be applied in case one may have decided that the organization's face-to-face salesperson needs to have a high level of self-confidence. If the organization therefore is to consider using an assessment of self-confidence to assist management in its hiring decision, the human resource personnel in charge will need "to evaluate whether the test really does assess the construct of self-confidence that it claims to measure." 12. This can be done the best way by looking into "the publisher's manual for the test and find evidence that the publisher has correlated scores on this test with scores on established tests of the same construct"13.This aspect of validity is believed to be one of the two most important aspect but it is characterized by its being somewhat technical as numbers are involved. It therefore requires training in the test or psychometric assessment as a rule.14 The other aspect of test is criterion validity, the evidence of which is more difficult to obtain as compared with construct validity evidence. But since this aspect is one of the two most important areas of validity as that of the third aspect, a reasonable amount of investment would really help the company. Under this aspect, there is a need connect scores on our test with performance, a way of validating perhaps where there decisions made in selections are correct or sustainable. By taking the above example again, one would expect scores on self-confidence to predict face-to-face sales performance.15 Under this, there is also a need to look to the publisher's manual for evidence rather than carrying out the study by the HR people themselves, so that test will attain criterion-validity.16 2.2.2 What is the right way to test validity and reliability' In conducting the test, it is not enough just to have is best assessed by having somebody that one knows to complete the test. PsyAsia International explained that reliability is characteristically gauged by using the results of a considerable e group of people and should not be limited to just one or two people17. It added ways of resolving validity, where is asserted that there are a number of forms of reliability. It cited among others, internal consistency which measures up the extent to which each question in the test is taken in relation to the overall scale score, whilst test-retest measures up the consistency of test scores over time. As for reliability information, PsyAsia International18 posited that it should also be found in the publisher's manual. Not being able to locate the same from the said manual could really bring serious doubts on whether there is integrity of the test. PsyAsia International19 further explained about the requirement of the comparison of the candidate's results to a group of similar others, whereby most psychometric tests are used in selection. Making the comparison of the results affords meaningful inferences and implications.20 This could be illustrated by the fact if one is told that he or she 7/20 on a certain aspect, say patience, this would mean very little in the absence of any comparison made on how other people might have measured themselves about the same question. Thus common sense may prompt one to ask how other people who took the test scored, hence the importance of a test having been standardised on suitable groups21 of people or what they call in psychology often referred to as a "norm group." As confirmation of this phenomenon, PsyAsia International cited the case about one of its clients who reported to them that he/she contacted the publisher making the claims above by email, where the client asked about reliability and validity of the test as well as whether or not local norms were available.22 PsyAsia International emphasized also that, having developed test in one country when taken to another country would require one to pass through a lengthy process of translation, validation and reliability checks.23 This is realization that the results of test could vary across cultures as different cultures have their own unique way of responding to psychological questions. PsyAsia International was of course aware that not many people do realise this reality and would readily assume that a test can easily be transported from one country to another just by taking it to a professional translator, which is not true.24 To support its point in emphasizing cultural limit of tests, PsyAsia International cited the fact that despite the growth in the use of personality tests as indicators of work performance, number Chinese researchers have criticized Western-developed personality tests used in China and throughout Asia.25 Citing their concerns that Western-developed tests may have "blind-spots" in their assessment and thereby ignore potentially important cultural differences such as face, family-orientation and harmony, PsyAsia International could only agree that these Chinese researchers have always the right to do the same.26 The application of test of validity carries the assumption also of validity of assumptions in relation to time, hence it must be made clear also that tests result are only as good for certain points in time, hence there is a need to determine reliability of tests in relation to time. 2.3. What are the consequences of not being able to properly evaluate test of validity and reliability' Not evaluating properly the test of validity or reliability would have the meaning of using a product that is not tested for its effectiveness and making recurring decision of the basis of unproven assumptions. This could be costly to management and this could actually be taken as failure to manage because of lack of accountability for results. 3. Conclusion The use of psychometric tests in selection does really have many positive features but concerns cannot be dispensed with because the test could not be attaining its purpose. Not attaining its purpose of course includes not being valid because the requirements for valid use and application are not complied with. The test for validity include: (1) face validity which could be determined by simply asking if the questions in the test look like they are measuring what the test purports to measure; (2) content validity, where it is required to know whether the test questions are sufficiently representative of all of the possible questions that could assess the construct we are interested in ; (3) construct validity which may be applied in case one may have decided that the organization's face-to-face salesperson needs to have a high level of self-confidence ; (4) criterion validity, the evidence of which is more difficult to obtain as compared with construct validity evidence. After validity test comes reliability test, which will tell whether the same results could be produces using the same tests under the same assumption. It may further be concluded, therefore, that having positive factors in also an implied admission of the presence of negative factors as there are always two sides of the coin for the an issue, the advantages and the disadvantages. 4. Works Cited: Briscoe and Schuler, International Human Resource Management: Policies & Practices for the Global Enterprise ; Routledge, 2004 Buunk and Gibbons , Health, Coping, and Well-Being: Perspectives from Social Comparison Theory ; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1997 Coffey and Shearmur , The Identification of Employment Centres in Canadian Metropolitan Areas: The Example of Montreal, 1996; The Canadian Geographer, Vol. 45, 2001 PsyAsia International Psychometric Tests and Assessment at Work, 2007 http://www.assessmentcentral.com/, {www document} URL, Accessed November 20,2007 Read More