Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-7tdvq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-19T22:20:57.328Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Ideal Point Model in Action: How the Use of Computer Adaptive Personality Scales Benefits Organizations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Tracy M. Kantrowitz  and
Kathy A. Tuzinski
Tracy M. Kantrowitz*
Affiliation:
PreVisor
Kathy A. Tuzinski
Affiliation:
PreVisor
*
E-mail: tkantrowitz@previsor.com, Address: PreVisor, 1805 Old Alabama Road, Suite 150, Roswell, GA 30076
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 3 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 507 - 510
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2010 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Borman, W. C., Buck, D. E., Hanson, M. A., Motowidlo, S. J., Stark, S., & Drasgow, F. (2001). An examination of the comparative reliability, validity, and accuracy of performance ratings made using computerized adaptive rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 965–973. Google Scholar
Borman, W. C., Houston, J. S., Schneider, R. J., & Ferstl, K. L. (2005). Adaptive personality scales: The concept and initial validation results . Presented at the 47th International Military Testing Association Conference, Singapore.Google Scholar
Drasgow, F., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Stark, S. (2010). 75 years after Likert: Thurstone was right! Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 465–476.Google Scholar
Houston, J. S., Borman, W. C., Farmer, W. L., & Bearden, R. M. (2005). Development of the Enlisted Computer Adaptive Personality Scales (ENCAPS) for the United States Navy, Phase 2 (Institute Report No. 503). Minneapolis, MN: Personnel Decisions Research Institutes. Google Scholar
Morgeson, F. P., Campion, M. A., Dipboye, R. L., Hollenbeck, J. R., Murphy, K., & Schmitt, N. (2007). Reconsidering the use of personality tests in personnel selection contexts. Personnel Psychology, 60, 683–729. Google Scholar
Schneider, R. J., Ferstl, K. L., Houston, J. S., Borman, W. C., Lords, A. O., & Bearden, R. M. (2006). Revision and expansion of Navy Computer Adaptive Personality Scales (NCAPS) (Institute Report No. 550). Minneapolis, MN: Personnel Decisions Research Institutes. Google Scholar
Stark, S., & Drasgow, F. (1998). Application of an item response theory ideal point model to computer adaptive assessment of job performance . Paper presented at the 13th Annual Conference for the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX.Google Scholar
Underhill, C. M., Lords, A. O., & Bearden, R. M. (2006, October). Fake resistance of a forced choice paired-comparisons personality measure. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Military Testing Association, Kingston, Canada.Google Scholar
Zinnes, J. L., & Griggs, R. A. (1974). Probabilistic, multidimensional unfolding analysis. Psychometrika, 39, 327–350. Google Scholar