PSYC 131-10
Dr. Carla Messenger
!1
Abstract
The Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised (JPI-R) is a test designed to assess
personality constituencies relating to leadership. The instrument discriminates ideal leadership
candidates and promising employees from the application pool. The instrument is effective if
employed in conjunction with additional forms of performance evaluation.
!2
!3
!4
!5
personality measurement and research (Pittenger, 2004, 2). Coined by personality psychologist
Lewis Goldberg, the Big Five, or Five-Factor Model of Personality, is one of the most
widely researched topics in personality psychology (Ashton et al, 1998, 244). Advanced by the
Lexical Hypothesis, the words invented for a given language describe, individual differences
in personality are reflections of real human behaviors, and the number of words we have
invented is in direct proportion to the importance of the behavior described (Paunonen &
Jackson, 2000, 822). The model maintains that lower level personality traits, or all personality
traits, can be combined into five, orthogonal, all-inclusive, universal factors[which] have
generally been labeled as Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism and
Openness to Experience. (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 42). It is appropriate to briefly define the
aforementioned traits: Extraversion indicates the propensity to socialize; Agreeableness
represents flexibility and ability to compromise; Conscientiousness refers to personal
responsibility; Neuroticism, or tendencies to experience distress in demanding situations;
Openness to Experience, or reception of new ideas, (Messenger, 2007).
Essentially, the
abovementioned constructs are best recognized as individual continuums; for example, on a 10point scale, 0 representing extreme introversion, and 10 representing extreme extroversion, an
individual may report traits qualified as 5.5, or somewhat extroverted, but not entirely. As an
avid proponent of psychological testing, Dr. Douglas N. Jackson, was a champion of rational
construction strategy- a psychometric tenet maintaining, that using human judgment to select
items is compatible with psychometric validity (Pittenger 2004, 2). Jackson recognized the
intrinsic value of personality testing in the institutional setting and advocated the administration
of such tests to recruiting organizations.
!6
Establishing Sigma Assessment Systems (SAS), Dr. Douglas N. Jackson, regarded as the
authority in psychological human assessment, sought to design and market test administration to
organizations associated with personnel selection, team-building exercises, managerial
counseling and psychological research, such as NASA, USSOCOM, AT&T, the Intel
Corporation, Daimler Chrysler, (Hoekstra, 3,7). According to SAS, personality can determine
important characteristics like dependability, self-discipline, leadership, and the ability to make
good impressions on others; concordantly, the Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised provides
a measurethat reflects social, cognitive, and value orientations which affect an individuals
functioning- essential psychological skill-sets for the workplace (Hoekstra, 5). Jackson
developed the first Jackson Personality Inventory in 1976 (Harrison et al, 2005, 1390). Since
inception, the test has undergone one revision, and is the second edition available, known as the
Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised (Pittenger, 2004, 1). The JPI-R is widely regarded and
distributed, demonstrating excellent psychometric properties and favorably reviewed by the
Mental Measurements Yearbook (Ashton et al, 1998, 244) (Hoekstra, 5). The test is intended to
measure normal personality functioning for use in schools, colleges, and universities[while]
its clinical application is geared toward traditional counseling psychology settings, particularly
career counseling and personnel selection in industry (Pittenger, 2004, 3). The JPI-R is
conveniently organized, constructed in a manner involving a sequential program of item
selection and test validation (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 43). Achieved by careful analysis,
SAS boasts the elaborate construction of the test, aiming to maximize item content saturation in
relation to desirability variance; maximize scale reliabilities; minimize inter-scale
redundancies (Hoekstra, 8).
!7
!8
herselfand directed to decide whether they feel true or false about them(Harrison et al, 2005,
1390).
!9
20-item infrequency scale, a metric detecting malingerers (Hoekstra, 9). The elimination of 20
items ultimately reduced the original test of 320 statements to 300, to facilitate use for
employment screening (Pittenger, 2004, 4) (Hoekstra, 9). The additional coverage of extended
distributional characteristics, which includes the new normsfor blue-collar workers and
white collar executives, enables benchmarking (Pittenger, 2004, 4). Ostensibly, the revisions
afford a much more comprehensive analysis of the assessment. Further analysis of the
psychometric properties of the JPI-R will demonstrate the precision and accuracy of the
instrument.
The JPI-R is considered to be a psychometrically sound assessment (Jackson, 2007).
Psychometric properties include substantial levels of reliability, freedom from desirability and
acquiescence bias, and convergent and contrasted groups validity (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996,
43). Moreover, studies prove JPI-R scales as valid predictors of migraine suffering, wrestling
ability, intention to immigrate... (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 43). Further examination of the
standard psychometric properties, reliability, validity, norms, readability, and scoring techniques,
render the JPI-R as a practical and accurate assessment instrument.
SAS reports reliability factors in two studies exhibiting median internal consistency
reliabilities of 0.90 and 0.93 (Bentlers Theta) (Hoekstra, 12). Concerning the 5 JPI-R variables,
clearly the factors emerged consistently across several data [and] are both manifestly
interpretable and highly replicable (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996, 57). Measured in Cronbachs
Alpha, a scale of a low 0 and an high of 1, internal consistency is the number of similar
items found in a given test, accounting for a given question asked in a number of varying forms
(2004). Median-scale reliabilities include ranges from 0.78 to 0.82 (Smither, 2005). Coefficient
!10
reliabilities of 0.84-0.95 have been reported for the overall scale, while other reports observe
values of 0.81-0.84 on the Risk Taking subscale (Harrison et al, 2005, 1390). Critics maintain
that although internal consistency measures such as Bentlers Theta and Cronbachs coefficient
alphas are reported, the measures do not speak to the broader and extremely important issue of
test-retest reliability (Pittenger, 2004, 2). Critics of the JPI-R are disappointed with the
conversion of alpha coefficients into standard errors of measurement, as it becomes misleading
because it does not represent random variation due to the passage of time (Pittenger, 2004, 2).
Several JPI-R studies evidence stable test validity for a number of positions and settings
(Jackson, 2007). Validity measures include analysis of two multi-trait- multi-method matrices
employing adjective checklist, self- rating, and peer ratings, correlating the 15 sub-scales, or 5
cluster scales, to criterion including occupational preferences to relationships with dimensions
of executive performance(Jackson, 2007). Critics argue that construct validity is noticeably
absent, failing to provide a rationale for the 15 chosen personality traits (Pittenger, 2004, 2).
However, SAS asserts the correlations of JPI-R and other personality measures provide
convergent and discriminant validity (Jackson, 2007).
Norms are formulated by the responses of 1,107 participants, including 367 males and
740 males, representing a number of educational institutions in North America (Jackson,
2007). Another set of norms is derived from a total of 893 blue-collar workers, consisting of 629
males and 264 males (Jackson, 2007). A third set of norms is based on the scores of 555 senior
executives (Jackson, 2007). Although the revised edition of the JPI-R is far superior with respect
to norms, as it includes additional norms of blue-collar workers and executive populations, some
11
!
critics would prefer the collection of norms for high school students (Paunonen & Jackson, 1996,
43).
On the surface, administrators consider the JPI-R easy to score (Pittenger, 2004, 2). The
300 statements offer a carbonless scoring template facilitating rapid scoring and quicker
turnarounds of reports (Pittenger, 2004, 2). Scoring of the JPI-R inventory entails collating
responses according to the 15 personality traits and 5 cluster traits, and each trait or variable, is
scored, tabulated and converted to a standard T-Score, as the higher the T-score for each
personality variable, the greater the probability that the participant will show that particular
behavior (Harrison et al, 2005, 1390). SAS offers instructions for hand-scoring and mail-in
scoring reports, featuring a profile of the 15 JPI-R scale scores, descriptions of high and low
scorers for each side, a profile of the 5 JPI-R cluster scores, administrative indices and a table of
raw responses (Jackson, 2007). The JPI-R requires a Level B qualifications. According to
Pearson Assessments, a test designer in compliance with standards established by the American
Psychological Association (APA) and the National Council on Measurement in Education
(NMEA), a Level B qualification demands a Level 2 clearance, requiring a User has
completed a bachelors degree program that included (a) coursework in the principles of
measurement and in the administration and interpretations of tests and (b) formal training in the
content area of the test (e.g. achievement, speech and language etc (2007).
Evidently, the JPI-R is well measured and equipped with the firm psychometric standards
of reliability, validity, normed populations, readability, accommodating an elegant and efficient
scoring process, which deliver an accurate assessment instrument. Recognizing the JPI-R
!12
!13
!14
not always the case. Before the establishment of the College Entrance Examination board in
1899, scholastic aptitude testing was not considered for admission (Gregory, 2007).
Concordantly, is it fair to posit that psychological tests administered in the institutional settings
of commerce and government, like the JPI-R, will gradually become commonplace, following
the SAT in the institutes of higher-education.
Works Cited
(2004, July 25). Essentials of a Good Psychological Test. Retrieved November 19, 2007, from
Wilderdom. Web site: http://www.wilderdom.com/personality/
L3-2EssentialsGoodPsychologicalTest.html
(2007). Effective January 1, 2007 - Qualification Levels and Requirements. Retrieved November
19, 2007, from Pearson Assessments Web site: http://www.pearsonassessments.com/
catalog/qualification.htm
(2007)-2. Personal Style Questionnaire Test Drive for Alex Singleton. Retrieved November 19,
2007, from sigmatesting.com. Web site: http://sigmatesting.com/isapi/sttestdrives.dll
Ashton, M.C., Jackson, D.N., Helmes, E., & Paunonen, S.V. (1998). Joint Factor Analysis of the
Personality Research Form and the Jackson Personality Inventory: Comparisons with the
Big Five. Journal of Research in Personality, 32, Pages: 243-250.
!15
Bagozzi, R.P. (1978). Sales Performance and Satisfaction as a Function of Individual Difference,
Interpersonal, and Situational Factors. Journal of Marketing Research. 15, Pages:
517-531.
Gregory, R. J. Psychological Testing. Fifth. Boston: Pearson Education, 2007, Page: 252.
Harrison, J.W., Young, J.M., Butow, P., Salkeld, G., & Solomon, M.J. (2005). Is it worth the
risk? A systematic review of instruments that measure risk propensity for use in the heath
setting. Social Science & Medicine. 60, Pages: 1385-1396.
Hoekstra, S. (2004). Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised. Presented by Sigma Assessment
Systems Inc. Retrieved November 19, 2007 from Web site: http://
www.sigmaassessmentsystems.com/assessments/jpir.asp, Slides: 3-12.
Jackson, D. N. (2007). Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised. Retrieved November 19, 2007,
from Sigma Assessment Systems Web site: http://www.sigmaassessmentsystems.com/
assessments/jpir.asp
Kane, K. (1995, October). The Riddle of Job Interviews. Fast Company, 1, Retrieved November
19, 2007, from http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/01/jobint.html
Messenger, C. (2007, Fall). Origins of Personality Assessment. PSYC 131: The George
Washington University. November 15, 2007.
Paunonen, S.V., & Jackson, D.N. (1996). The Jackson Personality Inventory and the Five-Factor
Model of Personality. Journal of Research in Personality. 30, Pages: 42-59.
Paunonen, S.V., & Jackson, D.N. (2000). What Is Beyond the Big Five? Plenty! Journal of
Personality. 68, Pages: 821-835.
Pittenger, D. J. (2004). Jackson Personality Inventory-Revised. Mental Measurements
Yearbook. 13. Retrieved November 19,2007, from EBSCOhost Research Database,
Pages: 1-11.
Reddon, R., & Jackson, D.N. (1989). Readability of Three Adult Personality Tests: Basic
Personality Inventory, Jackson Personality Inventory, and Personality Research Form-E.
Journal of Personality Assessment. 53, Pages: 180-183.
Smither, J.W. (2005 April). The Relationship Between Leaders' Personality and Their Reactions
to and Use of Multisource Feedback: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY. Group &
Organization Management, 30, Retrieved November 19, 2007, from http://
proxygw.wrlc.org/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.proxygw.wrlc.org/pqdweb?
did=810059371&sid=1&Fmt=4&clientld=31812&RQT=309&VName=PQD
!16
Weber, R.L. (2004, May, 18). Want A Job? Hand Over Your SAT Results. The Christian Science
Monitor, Retrieved November 19, 2007, from http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0518/
p13s01-legn.html