Loading…

Broad Versus Narrow Facets of Integrity: Predictive Validity and Subgroup Differences

Selection researchers continue to debate the relative value of broad versus narrow personality constructs. We investigated whether broad and narrow dimensions of integrity are differentially related to the performance of customer service managers (N = 152). A judgmental sort of items from a well-kno...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Human performance 2005-04, Vol.18 (2), p.151-177
Main Authors: Van Iddekinge, Chad H., Taylor, Mary Anne, Eidson, Jr, Carl E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-de8285ba424a921bf5d0a7f5f8faa254a3c4af2f3f5b651c75bfdbee3ef02adf3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-de8285ba424a921bf5d0a7f5f8faa254a3c4af2f3f5b651c75bfdbee3ef02adf3
container_end_page 177
container_issue 2
container_start_page 151
container_title Human performance
container_volume 18
creator Van Iddekinge, Chad H.
Taylor, Mary Anne
Eidson, Jr, Carl E.
description Selection researchers continue to debate the relative value of broad versus narrow personality constructs. We investigated whether broad and narrow dimensions of integrity are differentially related to the performance of customer service managers (N = 152). A judgmental sort of items from a well-known overt integrity test revealed 8 distinct facets of integrity. Facet correlations with supervisor ratings of performance ranged from -.16 to .18. Two facets, honesty image and norms of general dishonesty, had stronger relationship with performance than did the broad integrity scale, and their multiple correlation was about 3 times larger than the validity coefficient of the broad scale. The identified facets of integrity also varied in the subgroup differences they produced (e.g., d = -0.08 to 0.77 for race), with the 2 most predictive facets yielding somewhat larger ethnic group differences than many of the other facets. Overall results suggest that integrity is a multifaceted construct and that the prediction and understanding of behavior at work may be improved by focusing on more narrowly defined dimensions of integrity.
doi_str_mv 10.1207/s15327043hup1802_3
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1207_s15327043hup1802_3</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>847268611</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-de8285ba424a921bf5d0a7f5f8faa254a3c4af2f3f5b651c75bfdbee3ef02adf3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRsFb_gKfFe3Szm21SwYNf1UJRQdvrMsnu1JQ0G2cTS_-9KfUmeBp4eJ-Z4WXsPBaXsRTpVYi1kqlI1GfXxJmQRh2wwY5FO3jIBiIb62gsM33MTkJYCSFSLUcDNr8jD5YvHIUu8Bcg8hs-gcK1gXvk07p1Syrb7TV_I2fLoi2_HV9AVdoecqgtf-_yJfmu4Q8loiNXFy6csiOEKriz3zlk88njx_1zNHt9mt7fzqJCyayNrMv6j3JIZAJjGeeorYAUNWYIIHUCqkgAJSrU-UjHRapztLlzyqGQYFEN2cV-b0P-q3OhNSvfUd2fNFJqmYhEyD4k96GCfAjk0DRUroG2JhZm1575214v3eylskZPa9h4qqxpYVt5QoK6KINR__g_UtJ5hA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>225240402</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Broad Versus Narrow Facets of Integrity: Predictive Validity and Subgroup Differences</title><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate</source><source>SPORTDiscus with Full Text</source><source>Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection</source><creator>Van Iddekinge, Chad H. ; Taylor, Mary Anne ; Eidson, Jr, Carl E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Van Iddekinge, Chad H. ; Taylor, Mary Anne ; Eidson, Jr, Carl E.</creatorcontrib><description>Selection researchers continue to debate the relative value of broad versus narrow personality constructs. We investigated whether broad and narrow dimensions of integrity are differentially related to the performance of customer service managers (N = 152). A judgmental sort of items from a well-known overt integrity test revealed 8 distinct facets of integrity. Facet correlations with supervisor ratings of performance ranged from -.16 to .18. Two facets, honesty image and norms of general dishonesty, had stronger relationship with performance than did the broad integrity scale, and their multiple correlation was about 3 times larger than the validity coefficient of the broad scale. The identified facets of integrity also varied in the subgroup differences they produced (e.g., d = -0.08 to 0.77 for race), with the 2 most predictive facets yielding somewhat larger ethnic group differences than many of the other facets. Overall results suggest that integrity is a multifaceted construct and that the prediction and understanding of behavior at work may be improved by focusing on more narrowly defined dimensions of integrity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0895-9285</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-7043</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1207/s15327043hup1802_3</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</publisher><subject>Customer services ; Honesty ; Managers ; Personality</subject><ispartof>Human performance, 2005-04, Vol.18 (2), p.151-177</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 2005</rights><rights>Copyright Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 2005</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-de8285ba424a921bf5d0a7f5f8faa254a3c4af2f3f5b651c75bfdbee3ef02adf3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-de8285ba424a921bf5d0a7f5f8faa254a3c4af2f3f5b651c75bfdbee3ef02adf3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Van Iddekinge, Chad H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taylor, Mary Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eidson, Jr, Carl E.</creatorcontrib><title>Broad Versus Narrow Facets of Integrity: Predictive Validity and Subgroup Differences</title><title>Human performance</title><description>Selection researchers continue to debate the relative value of broad versus narrow personality constructs. We investigated whether broad and narrow dimensions of integrity are differentially related to the performance of customer service managers (N = 152). A judgmental sort of items from a well-known overt integrity test revealed 8 distinct facets of integrity. Facet correlations with supervisor ratings of performance ranged from -.16 to .18. Two facets, honesty image and norms of general dishonesty, had stronger relationship with performance than did the broad integrity scale, and their multiple correlation was about 3 times larger than the validity coefficient of the broad scale. The identified facets of integrity also varied in the subgroup differences they produced (e.g., d = -0.08 to 0.77 for race), with the 2 most predictive facets yielding somewhat larger ethnic group differences than many of the other facets. Overall results suggest that integrity is a multifaceted construct and that the prediction and understanding of behavior at work may be improved by focusing on more narrowly defined dimensions of integrity.</description><subject>Customer services</subject><subject>Honesty</subject><subject>Managers</subject><subject>Personality</subject><issn>0895-9285</issn><issn>1532-7043</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRsFb_gKfFe3Szm21SwYNf1UJRQdvrMsnu1JQ0G2cTS_-9KfUmeBp4eJ-Z4WXsPBaXsRTpVYi1kqlI1GfXxJmQRh2wwY5FO3jIBiIb62gsM33MTkJYCSFSLUcDNr8jD5YvHIUu8Bcg8hs-gcK1gXvk07p1Syrb7TV_I2fLoi2_HV9AVdoecqgtf-_yJfmu4Q8loiNXFy6csiOEKriz3zlk88njx_1zNHt9mt7fzqJCyayNrMv6j3JIZAJjGeeorYAUNWYIIHUCqkgAJSrU-UjHRapztLlzyqGQYFEN2cV-b0P-q3OhNSvfUd2fNFJqmYhEyD4k96GCfAjk0DRUroG2JhZm1575214v3eylskZPa9h4qqxpYVt5QoK6KINR__g_UtJ5hA</recordid><startdate>20050401</startdate><enddate>20050401</enddate><creator>Van Iddekinge, Chad H.</creator><creator>Taylor, Mary Anne</creator><creator>Eidson, Jr, Carl E.</creator><general>Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</general><general>Routledge, Taylor &amp; Francis Group</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20050401</creationdate><title>Broad Versus Narrow Facets of Integrity: Predictive Validity and Subgroup Differences</title><author>Van Iddekinge, Chad H. ; Taylor, Mary Anne ; Eidson, Jr, Carl E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-de8285ba424a921bf5d0a7f5f8faa254a3c4af2f3f5b651c75bfdbee3ef02adf3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Customer services</topic><topic>Honesty</topic><topic>Managers</topic><topic>Personality</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Van Iddekinge, Chad H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taylor, Mary Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eidson, Jr, Carl E.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><jtitle>Human performance</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Van Iddekinge, Chad H.</au><au>Taylor, Mary Anne</au><au>Eidson, Jr, Carl E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Broad Versus Narrow Facets of Integrity: Predictive Validity and Subgroup Differences</atitle><jtitle>Human performance</jtitle><date>2005-04-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>151</spage><epage>177</epage><pages>151-177</pages><issn>0895-9285</issn><eissn>1532-7043</eissn><abstract>Selection researchers continue to debate the relative value of broad versus narrow personality constructs. We investigated whether broad and narrow dimensions of integrity are differentially related to the performance of customer service managers (N = 152). A judgmental sort of items from a well-known overt integrity test revealed 8 distinct facets of integrity. Facet correlations with supervisor ratings of performance ranged from -.16 to .18. Two facets, honesty image and norms of general dishonesty, had stronger relationship with performance than did the broad integrity scale, and their multiple correlation was about 3 times larger than the validity coefficient of the broad scale. The identified facets of integrity also varied in the subgroup differences they produced (e.g., d = -0.08 to 0.77 for race), with the 2 most predictive facets yielding somewhat larger ethnic group differences than many of the other facets. Overall results suggest that integrity is a multifaceted construct and that the prediction and understanding of behavior at work may be improved by focusing on more narrowly defined dimensions of integrity.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia</cop><pub>Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc</pub><doi>10.1207/s15327043hup1802_3</doi><tpages>27</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0895-9285
ispartof Human performance, 2005-04, Vol.18 (2), p.151-177
issn 0895-9285
1532-7043
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1207_s15327043hup1802_3
source EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate; SPORTDiscus with Full Text; Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection
subjects Customer services
Honesty
Managers
Personality
title Broad Versus Narrow Facets of Integrity: Predictive Validity and Subgroup Differences
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T05%3A20%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Broad%20Versus%20Narrow%20Facets%20of%20Integrity:%20Predictive%20Validity%20and%20Subgroup%20Differences&rft.jtitle=Human%20performance&rft.au=Van%20Iddekinge,%20Chad%20H.&rft.date=2005-04-01&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=151&rft.epage=177&rft.pages=151-177&rft.issn=0895-9285&rft.eissn=1532-7043&rft_id=info:doi/10.1207/s15327043hup1802_3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E847268611%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c328t-de8285ba424a921bf5d0a7f5f8faa254a3c4af2f3f5b651c75bfdbee3ef02adf3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=225240402&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true