Subdimensional Structure of the Hogan Personality Inventory

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 277-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesús F. Salgado ◽  
Silvia Moscoso ◽  
Pamela Alonso
Keyword(s):  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Hogan Personality Inventory

A Personality-Based Measure of Employability

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Boudreaux ◽  
Brandon T. Ferrell ◽  
Nathan A. Hundley ◽  
Ryne A. Sherman
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Job Performance ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Personality Characteristics ◽  
Supervisor Ratings ◽  
Hogan Personality Inventory

Abstract. Hogan et al. (2013) proposed a personality-based model of employability that describes individual differences in (1) being rewarding to deal with, (2) being able to learn the job, and (3) being willing to work hard. In this study, we evaluated the model by selecting subscales from the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI; Hogan & Hogan, 2007 ) that best predicted supervisor ratings of competencies related to these three constructs. The psychometric properties of those scales were examined in independent samples. Results indicated that the scales converged with similar scales from other instruments, covaried in meaningful ways with observer descriptions, and predicted supervisor ratings of job performance. The measure – which is 64% shorter than the full HPI – includes personality characteristics applicable to most jobs across multiple job families that can be used to identify successful candidates.

Differential Item Functioning by Sex and Race in the Hogan Personality Inventory

Assessment ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 442-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Sheppard ◽  
Kyunghee Han ◽  
Stephen M. Colarelli ◽  
Guangdong Dai ◽  
Daniel W. King
Keyword(s):  
Differential Item Functioning ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Item Functioning ◽  
Hogan Personality Inventory

scholarly journals Comment on Anderson and Ones (2008)

2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lewis R. Goldberg ◽  
Kibeom Lee ◽  
Michael C. Ashton
Keyword(s):  
Personality Inventory ◽  
The Other ◽  
Personality Questionnaire ◽  
Scale Scores ◽  
Hogan Personality Inventory

The ‘erratum and addendum’ by Anderson and Ones (2008) does not state unambiguously that participants' Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI) scale scores were incorrectly matched with their scores on the other inventories' scales, nor does it mention the existence of other errors in the scoring of the Occupational Personality Questionnaire (OPQ) and Business Personality Indicator (BPI) scales. We demonstrate these errors and we recommend the retraction of the articles by Anderson and Ones (2003) and Ones and Anderson (2002). Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Predicting Students' Perceptions of Academic Misconduct on the Hogan Personality Inventory Reliability Scale

2008 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 495-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas H. Stone ◽  
Jennifer L. Kisamore ◽  
I. M. Jawahar
Keyword(s):  
Business Students ◽  
Academic Culture ◽  
Academic Misconduct ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Hierarchical Regression ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Hogan Personality Inventory

Interest and research on academic misconduct has become more salient in part due to recent publicized academic and organizational scandals. The current study investigated a possible interaction between perception of the university's academic culture and personality, conceptualized as Reliability, on students' perceptions of academic misconduct. A convenience sample of 217 university business students (91 men, 126 women), whose average age was 22.3 yr. ( SD = 4.4) was tested. Reliability was measured with an occupational scale included in the Hogan Personality Inventory. Two hierarchical regression analyses were conducted using Cheating Intentions and Likelihood of Reporting Cheating as criteria. Age, Reliability, Integrity Culture, and the interaction between scores on Reliability and Integrity Culture were entered as predictors. Only Age and Reliability scores were significant predictors of Cheating Intentions, while all variables were significant predictors for Likelihood of Reporting Cheating. Suggestions for practice and research are provided.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document