五大人格量表的效用分析—以Taylor-Russell、Naylor-Shine 及Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser 模型為例

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：16

、訪客IP：18.117.107.90

姓名

曾雅寧(Ya-ning Tseng) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

人力資源管理研究所

論文名稱

五大人格量表的效用分析—以Taylor-Russell、Naylor-Shine 及Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser 模型為例
(Utility analysis of the Big Five personality inventory by using Taylor-Russell model, Naylor-Shine model and Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser model)

相關論文

★ 人格特質對工作績效影響之探討-以F銀行財富管理事業群人員為例	★ 護理人員的人格特質與工作滿意及工作績效之關係—以工作壓力為調節變項
★ 護理人員之工作壓力、工作動機、工作滿意與工作績效的影響-以某公立醫院為例	★ 心理契約與勞雇關係之關聯性探討
★ 情緒智力對工作動機、工作滿意及工作績效之影響-以人力資源工作者為例。	★ 社會人際行為模式測驗與工作績效間關連性之探討
★ 財務與非財務獎酬對工作動機與工作滿意度之干擾研究-以M直銷公司為例	★ 薪酬制度與員工績效表現之個案研究
★ 領導行為、員工創新行為及績效表現關聯性之個案探討	★ 高科技廠商薪資策略與離職率關係之探討
★ 人力資源管理系統與組織文化之交互作用對組織績效的影響	★ 情境式與行為描述式結構性面談之比較研究
★ 日薪人員與月薪人員之工作動機傾向對其工作績效與工作滿意之影響	★ 本地員工人格特質與對外派人員的利他行為、互動適應之關連探討
★ 工作動機的效用分析	★ 人力資源活動對人力資源效能及組織效能之影響─以台灣千大企業為例

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

至系統瀏覽論文 ( 永不開放)

摘要(中)

過去關於五大人格特質的研究中，大多著重於其對於工作績效的效度，鮮少討論到他們的經濟價值。本篇研究即利用三種效用分析的模型（Taylor-Russell、Naylor-Shine 及Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser 模型）估計出使用五大人格量表作為甄選工具所產生的效用。在估計過程中，三種效用分析模型將被用來展現在使用甄選工具（如五大人格量表）時所需要的效用資訊，以增進決策的品質。使用五大人格量表作為甄選工具的效用將分別以「成功率(success ratio)」、「標準化的績效分數」以及「貨幣價值」之形式表現於三種模型之下。最後，本研究也深入探討效用分析的結果及其管理上的意涵。

摘要(英)

Previous research of Big Five measures drew attention to their validity to job performance, but their economic value remained rarely discussed. The present study adopts three utility analysis models, Taylor-Russell model, Naylor-Shine model, and Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser model, to estimate the utility of using Big Five personality inventory as a selection device. The estimation process demonstrates how the utility analysis models could be used to capture the utility information of selection devices such as Big Five personality inventory in order to improve the decision making. The utility of using Big Five personality inventory would be calculated in terms of success ratio, standardized performance score, and dollar value, for the three utility analysis models respectively. These results of utility analysis and their practical implication are discussed.

關鍵字(中)

★ 效用分析
★ 五大人格特質

關鍵字(英)

★ big five personalities
★ utility analysis

論文目次

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 4
2-1 Personalities 4
2-2 Big Five Taxonomy of Personality 7
2-3 Big Five Personalities and Job Performance 11
2-4 The Economic Gain of Better Performance by Selection 14
2-5 Utility Analysis and Models 17
2-5-1 Taylor-Russell Model 20
2-5-2 Naylor-Shine Model 21
2-5-3 Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser Model 22
2-6 Criterion-Related Validity and Utility Analysis 24
2-7 Estimation of the Economic Value of Job Performance (SDy) 25
CHAPTER THREE METHOD 30
3-1 Research Design 30
3-1-1 Taylor-Russell Model 31
3-1-2 Naylor-Shine Model 32
3-1-3 Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser Model 33
3-2 Sample 33
3-3 Measures 35
3-3-1 Job Performance 36
3-3-2 Big Five Personalities 36
3-3-3 Control Variables 38
3-3-4 Criterion-Related Validity 39
3-3-5 Economic Value of Job Performance (SDy) 40
3-3-6 Cost 42
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS 44
4-1 Descriptive Analysis 44
4-2 Regression Analysis 46
4-3 Utility Analysis 49
4-3-1 Taylor-Russell Model 49
4-3-2 Naylor-Shine Model 51
4-3-3 Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser Model 53
4-3-4 Break-Even Analysis for Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser Model 56
CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION 59
5-1 Discussion of Results 59
5-2 Implications 64
5-3 Future Research 67
5-4 Conclusions 68
REFERENCE 70
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Regression Analysis Design 30
Figure 2 Expected Success Ratios Under Taylor-Russell Model 51
Figure 3 Expected Average Increase in Job Performance Under Naylor-Shine
Model 53
Figure 4 Increased Utility Under Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser Model 55
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 The Big Five Dimensions and Sub-dimensions 9
Table 2 Example of Productivity Estimation 42
Table 3 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations 45
Table 4 Results of Regression Analysis of Supervisor-Rated Performance and Self-Rated Performance 48
Table 5 Hypothetical Calculations of Utility for Taylor-Russell Model (Supervisor-Rated Performance as Criterion) 49
Table 6 Utility Calculation Under Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser Model (Supervisor-Rated Performance as Criterion) 54
Table 7 Break-Even Analysis for Brogden-Cronbach-Gleser Model (Supervisor-Rated Performance as Criterion) 57

參考文獻

Allport, G. W., and Odbert, H. S. 1936. Trait-names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47(1, Whole No. 211).
Allport, G.W. 1961. Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Brogden, H.E. 1949. When testing pays off. Personnel Psychology, 2: 171-185.
Brogden, H.E. and Taylor, E.K. 1950. The dollar criterion – applying the cost accounting concept to criterion construction. Personnel Psychology, 3: 133-154.
Bond, M. H., Nakazato, H., & Shiraishi, D. 1975. Universality and distinctiveness in dimensions of Japanese person perception. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 6: 346-357.
Barrett, G.V., Phillips, J.S. and Alexander, R.A. 1981. Concurrent and predictive validity designs. Personnel Psychology, 37: 407-422.
Boudreau, J. W. 1984. Decision theory contributions to HRM research and practice. Industrial Relations, 23: 198-217.
Birenbaum, M. & Montag, I. 1986. On the location of the sensation seeking construct in the personality domain. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 21: 356-373.
Bobko, P., Karren, R., Kerkar, S. P. 1987. Systematic research needs for understanding supervisory-based estimates of SDy in utility analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40: 69-95.
Botwin, M. D. & Buss, D. M. 1989. The structure of act report data: Is the five factor model of personality recaptured? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56: 988-1001.
Barrick, M.R. and Mount, M.K. 1991. The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44: 1-26.
Boudreau, J.W. 1991. Utility analysis for decisions in human resource management. In M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough (eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol.2, 2nd ed., pp. 621-745). Palo Also, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Barrick, M.R. and Mount, M.K. 1993. Autonomy as a moderator of the relationships between the big five personality dimensions and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78 (1): 111-118.
Barrick, M. R. & Mount, M. K. 1995. The personal characteristics inventory manual. Unpublished manuscript, Iowa: University of Iowa.
Barrick, M.R., Mount, M.K., and Judge, T.A. 2001. Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? Personality and Performance, 9: 9-30.
Brown T. J., Mowen J. C., Donavan D. T., Licata J. W. 2002. The customer orientation of service workers: Personality trait effects on self- and supervisor performance ratings. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1): 110-119.
Borman, W.C. 2004. Introduction to the special issue: Personality and the prediction of job performance: More than the Big Five. Human Performance, 17 (3): 267-269.
Barrick, M.R., Parks, L., Mount, M.K. 2005. Self-monitoring as a moderator of the relationships between personality traits and performance. Personnel Psychology, 58 (3): 745-767.
Cattell, R. B. 1947. Confirmation and clarification of primary personality factors. Psychomertrika, 12: 197-220.
Cronbach, L.J. and Glesser, G.C. 1965. Psychological tests and personnel decisions. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Cascio, W.F. and Ramos, R.A. 1986. Development and application of a new method for assessing job performance in behavioral/economic terms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 20-28.
Costa, P. T. & McCrae, R. R. 1985. The NEO Personality inventory manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Costa, P.T., and McCrae, R.R. 1989. NEO-Pl professional manual. Odessa. FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Costa, P. T., Jr., and McCrae, R. R. 1992. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Carson, K.P., Becker, J.S. and Henderson, J.A. 1998. Is utility really futile? A failure to replicate and an extension. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 84－96.
Cascio, W. 2000. Costing human resources: The financial impact of behavior in organizations. Ohio: South-Western College Publishing.
Dunnette, M. D., McCartney, J., Carlson, J. C., & Kirchner, W. K. 1962. A study of faking behavior on a force-choice self-description checklist. Personnel Psychology, 15: 13-24.
Digman, J. M. 1989. Five robust trait dimensions: Development, stability, and utility. Journal of Personality, 57: 195-214.
Dunn, W. S., Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Ones, D. S. 1995. Relative importance of personality and general mental ability in managers’ judgments of applicant qualifications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(4): 500-509.
Daniel, M. C., & Timothy, A. J. 1996. Person-organization fit, job choice decisions, and organizational entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 67(3): 294-331.
Drucker, P. 1999. Knowledge-worker productivity: the biggest challenge. California Management Review, 41(2): 79-85.
Davenport, T., Thomas, R., & Cantrell, S. 2002. The mysterious art and science of
knowledge-worker performance. MIT Sloan Management Review. 44(1): 23-9.
Emmett, A. 2004. Snake oil or science? That's the raging debate on personality testing. Workforce Management, 83(10): 90-92.
Erickson, P. B. 2004. Employer hiring tests grow sophisticated in quest for insight about applicants. Daily Oklahoman, May 16.
Faulder, L. 2005. The growing cult of personality tests. The Edmonton Journal, January 9: D6.
Guion, R.M. and Gottier, R.F. 1965. Validity of personality measures in personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 18: 135-164.
Greer, O. L., & Cascio, W. F. 1987. Is cost accounting the answer? Comparison of two behaviorally based methods for estimating the standard deviation of job performance in dollars with a cost-accounting-based approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72: 588-595.
Goldberg, L. R. 1990. An alternative “description of personality:” The Big Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59: 1216-1229.
Goldberg, L. R. 1992. The development of markers for the Big Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4: 26-42.
Gatewood, R.D. and Field, H.S. 2001. Human resource selection. Ohio: South-Western College Publishing.
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. C. 2006. The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40: 84-96.
Gill, C. M., & Hodgkinson, G. P. 2007. Development and validation of the five-factor model questionnaire (FFMQ): An adjectival-based personality inventory for use in occupational settings. Personnel Psychology, 60(3): 731-766.
Hogan R. 1983. A socioanalytic theory of personality. In Page MM. (Ed.), Personality current theory & research: Nebraska symposium on motivation. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Hough, L. M., Eaton, N. K., Dunnette, M. D., Kamp, J. D., & McCloy, R. A. 1990. Criterion-related validities of personality constructs and the effect of response distortion on those validities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 581-595.
Hofstee, W. K. B., de Raad, B., & Goldberg, L. R. 1992. Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63: 146-163.
Hunter, J. E., Schmidt, F. L., & Judiesch, M. K. 1990. Individual differences in output variability as a function of job complexity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 28-42.
Hoffman, C. C. 1996. Applying utility analysis to guide decisions on selection system content. Journal of Human Resource Costing and Accounting, 1(2): 9-17.
Hazer, J. T., & Highhouse, S. 1997. Factors influencing managers’ reactions to utility analysis: Effects of SDy method, information frame, and focal intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 104-112.
Hurtz, G. M. & Donovan, J. J. 2000. Personality and job performance: The five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 (6): 869-879.
Harel, G. H., Arditi-Vogel, A., & Janz, T. 2003. Comparing the validity and utility of behavior description interview versus assessment center ratings. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18: 94-104.
Heller, M. 2005. Court ruling that employer's integrity test violated ADA could open door to litigation. Workforce Management, 84 (9): 74-77.
John, O. P. 1989. Towards a taxonomy of personality descriptors. In D.M. Buss & N. Cantor (Eds.) Personality Psychology: Recent trends and emerging directions (pp. 261-271). NY: Springer-Verlag.
Judiesch, M.K., Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. 1993. Has the problem of judgment in utility analysis been solved? Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 903-911.
Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. 2002. Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3): 530-541.
Kemery, E. & Milbourn, G. 2004. The dollar value of improved customer-oriented retail sales personnel. Journal of American Academy of Business, 4(1/2): 298-301.
Locke, E. A. & Hulin, C. L. 1962. A review and evaluation of the validity studies of activity vector analysis. Personnel Psychology, 15: 25-42.
Latham, G. & Whyte, G. 1994. The futility of utility analysis. Personnel Psychology, 47: 31－46.
Law, K.S. & Myors, B. 1999. A modification of Raju, Burke, and Normand’s (1990) new model for utility analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 37(1): 39-51.
Michailis, W. & Eysenck, H. J. 1971. The determination of personality inventory factor patterns and intercorrelations by changes in real-life motivation. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 118: 223-234.
Mount, M. K., & Barrick, M. R. 1995. The Big Five personality dimensions: Implications for research and practice in human resources management. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 13: 153-200.
Mischel, W. 1981. Introduction to Personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Morrow, C. C., Jarrett, M. Q. & Rupinski, M. T. 1997. An investigation of the effect and economic utility of corporate-wide training. Personnel Psychology, 50(1): 91-117.
Mount, M. K., & Barrick, M. R. 1998. Five reasons why the “big five” article has been frequently cited. Personnel Psychology, 51(4): 849-857.
McManus, M.A. & Kelly, M.L. 1999. Personality measures and biodata: Evidence regarding their incremental predictive value in the life insurance industry. Personnel Psychology, 52: 137-148.
Mount, M., Ilies, R., & Johnson, E. 2006. Relationship of personality traits and counterproductive work behaviors: The mediating effects of job satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 59(3): 591-622.
Morgeson, F. P., Campion M. A., Dipboye R. L., Hollenbeck J. R., Murphy K., & Schmitt N. 2007. Are we getting fooled again? Coming to terms with limitations in the use of personality tests for personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 60(4): 1029-1049.
Naylor, J.C. & Shine, L.C. 1965. A table for determining the increase in mean criterion score obtained by using a selection device. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 3: 33-42.
Noller, P., Law, H., & Comrey, A. L. 1987. Cattell, Comrey, and Eysenck personality factors compared: More evidence for the five robust factors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53: 775-782.
Noe, R. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. M. 2006. Human Resource Management, Gaining A Competitive Advantage. New York: McGraw Hill International Edition
Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, & Schmidt, F. L. 1993. Comprehensive meta-analysis of integrity test validities: Findings and implications for personnel selection and theories of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78: 679-703.
Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C. & Judge T. A. 2007. In support of personality assessment in organizational settings. Personnel Psychology, 60(4): 995 – 1027.
Paunonen, S. V., Jackson, D. N., Trzebinski, J., & Forsterling, F. 1992. Personality Structure across cultures: A multimethod evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62: 447-456.
Peterson, S. J. & Byron, K. 2008. Exploring the role of hope in job performance: results from four studies. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(6): 785-803.
Ruch, F. L. & Ruch, W. W. 1967. The K factor as a (validity) suppressor variable in predicting success in selling. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51: 201-204.
Reilly, R. R. & Chao, G. T. 1982. Validity and fairness of some alternative employee selection procedures. Personnel Psychology, 35 (1): p1-62.
Raju, N. S., Burke, M. J. & Normand, J. 1990. A new approach for utility analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 3-12.
Ramirez, Y. W. & Nembhard, D. A. 2004. Measuring knowledge worker productivity: A taxonomy. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(4): 602-628.
Schmidt, F.L. & Hoffman, B. 1973. An empirical comparison of three methods of assessing the utility of a selection device. Journal of industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1: 1-11.
Schwab, D. P. & Packard, G. L. 1973. Response distortion on the Gordon Personal Profile in a selection context: Some implications for predicting employee tenure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 58: 372-374.
Schmidt, F.L., Hunter, J.E., McKenzie, R.C., and Muldrow, T.W. (1979) Impact of valid selection procedures on work-force productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology: 64: 609-626.
Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. 1983. Individual differences in productivity: An empirical test of estimates derived from studies of selection procedure utility. Journal of Applies Psychology, 68: 407-414.
Schmitt, N., Gooding R., Noe R., & Kirsch M. 1984. Metaanalyses of validity studies published between 1964 and 1982 and the investigation of study characteristics. Personnel Psychology, 37: 407-422.
Schmit, M. J. & Ryan, A. M. 1992. Test-Taking dispositions: A missing link? Journal of Applied Psychology: 77: 629-637.
Schmit, M. J. & Ryan, A. M. 1993. The Big Five in personnel selection : Factor structure in applicant and nonapplicant populations. Journal of Applied Psychology: 78: 966-974.
Stumpf, H. 1993. The factor structure of the Personality Research Form: A Cross-national evaluation. Journal of Personality, 61: 27-45.
Schneider, B., Goldstein, H. W., & Smith, D B. 1995. The ASA framework: An update. Personnel Psychology, 48(4): 747-773.
Salgado, J.F. 1999. Personnel selection methods. In C.L., Cooper and I.T., Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology. (Vol.14, pp.1-54). Chichester, NY: Wiley.
Schmit, M. J., Kihm, J. A., & Robie, C. 2000. Development of a global measure of personality. Personnel Psychology, 53:153-193.
Taylor, H.C. & Russell, J.T. 1939. The relationship of validity coefficients to the practical effectiveness of tests in selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 23: 565-578.
Tett, R., Jackson, D., & Rothstein, M. 1991. Personality measures as predictors of job performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 44: 703-742.
Thomas, B. E. & Baron, J. P. 1994. Evaluating knowledge worker productivity: Literature review. USACERL Interim Report FF-94/27, USACERL, Champaign, IL.
Tett, R. P. & Christiansen, N. D. 2007. Personality tests at the crossroads: A response to Morgeson, Campion, Dipboye, Hollenbeck, Murphy, and Schmitt. Personnel Psychology; 60(4): 967-993.
van Hooft, E. A., van der Flier, H., & Minne, M. R. 2006. Construct validity of multi-source performance ratings: An examination of the relationship of self-, supervisor-, and peer-ratings with cognitive and personality measures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14(1): 67.
Whyte, G. & Latham, G. 1997. The futility of utility analysis revisited: When even an expert fails. Personnel Psychology, 50: 601-610.
Wright, P.M., Kacmar, K.M., McMaham, G.C., & Deleeuw, K. 1995. P = f (M × A): Cognitive ability as a moderator of the relationship between personality and job performance. Journal of Management, 21: 1129-1139.
Yang, K., & Bond, M. H. 1990. Exploring implicit personality theories with indigenous or imported constructs: The Chinese case. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58: 1087-1095.

指導教授

房美玉(Mei-yu Fang)

審核日期

2009-7-18

推文