Critically discuss whether the widespread use of the Myers Briggs Type Indicator is justified by its reliability and validity
The role of personality measuring instruments in the workplace has been under debate and there have been different viewpoints regarding the matter. Some researchers argue that personality measures do not aid the hiring process as accurately as they should (Christiansen, Goffin, Johnston, & Rothstein, 1994; Rosse, Stecher, Miller, & Levin, 1998), while others oppose that notion and support the claim that personality tests help employers and employees make the right choice (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Hough, 1992; Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991; Tieger & Barron-Tieger, 1993). Morgenson and colleagues (2007a) argued that …show more content…
These criteria are considered to be crucial for psychological research and measurement (Del Greco, Walop & McCarthy, 1987; Golafshani, 2003; Cook & Beckman, 2006; Kimberlin & Winterstein, 2008;) as validity and reliability are highly important for a test to fulfil its functions properly and accurately (Del Greco, Walop & McCarthy, 1987). To this day we continue to use a famous measure of personality, in occupational situations, which is very often criticised for its lack of validity and reliability – the MBTI (Pittenger, 1993a; Pittenger, 1993b; Boyle, 1995; Capraro & Capraro, 2002; Pittenger, …show more content…
43). Reliability indicates whether a test shows consistent results of the measured aspect; validity indicates whether a test is showing results linked to the specific aspect we intend to measure (Del Greco, Walop & McCarthy, 1987). There are two main types of reliability – test-retest reliability and examiner reliability (Carducci, 2009, p. 43-44). “Test-retest reliability examines the consistency of assessment over time” (Carducci, 2009, p.43). In order for researchers to assess this they can administer the test to the same group of participants they invited initially. Of course, time will be a factor in this scenario – if it is a too long gap between the initial test and re-test, the aspect which was measured might have changed over the time period; if the gap is too short the participants will most likely be able to easily recall the test’s content (Del Greco, Walop & McCarthy, 1987; Carducci, 2009, p.44). As well as test-retest reliability there is also examiner reliability which “examines consistency across raters” (Carducci, 2009, p.44). The idea of examiner reliability is that the test should not be ambiguous for the participants contributing the scores and for the researchers analysing the scores as well (Carducci, 2009, p.44). The test has to be clear and understandable but the researchers have to inhibit any bias as much as possible as
The role of personality measuring instruments in the workplace has been under debate and there have been different viewpoints regarding the matter. Some researchers argue that personality measures do not aid the hiring process as accurately as they should (Christiansen, Goffin, Johnston, & Rothstein, 1994; Rosse, Stecher, Miller, & Levin, 1998), while others oppose that notion and support the claim that personality tests help employers and employees make the right choice (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Hough, 1992; Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991; Tieger & Barron-Tieger, 1993). Morgenson and colleagues (2007a) argued that …show more content…
These criteria are considered to be crucial for psychological research and measurement (Del Greco, Walop & McCarthy, 1987; Golafshani, 2003; Cook & Beckman, 2006; Kimberlin & Winterstein, 2008;) as validity and reliability are highly important for a test to fulfil its functions properly and accurately (Del Greco, Walop & McCarthy, 1987). To this day we continue to use a famous measure of personality, in occupational situations, which is very often criticised for its lack of validity and reliability – the MBTI (Pittenger, 1993a; Pittenger, 1993b; Boyle, 1995; Capraro & Capraro, 2002; Pittenger, …show more content…
43). Reliability indicates whether a test shows consistent results of the measured aspect; validity indicates whether a test is showing results linked to the specific aspect we intend to measure (Del Greco, Walop & McCarthy, 1987). There are two main types of reliability – test-retest reliability and examiner reliability (Carducci, 2009, p. 43-44). “Test-retest reliability examines the consistency of assessment over time” (Carducci, 2009, p.43). In order for researchers to assess this they can administer the test to the same group of participants they invited initially. Of course, time will be a factor in this scenario – if it is a too long gap between the initial test and re-test, the aspect which was measured might have changed over the time period; if the gap is too short the participants will most likely be able to easily recall the test’s content (Del Greco, Walop & McCarthy, 1987; Carducci, 2009, p.44). As well as test-retest reliability there is also examiner reliability which “examines consistency across raters” (Carducci, 2009, p.44). The idea of examiner reliability is that the test should not be ambiguous for the participants contributing the scores and for the researchers analysing the scores as well (Carducci, 2009, p.44). The test has to be clear and understandable but the researchers have to inhibit any bias as much as possible as