Moderator effects of job complexity on the validity of forced-choice personality inventories for predicting job performance
Open accessAbstract
Research has demonstrated that job complexity moderates the validity of general mental ability (GMA), the relationship between personality and job satisfaction, and the relationship between GMA and job satisfaction. However, no published research has investigated whether job complexity moderates the criterion validity of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality for predicting job performance. This paper reports a meta-analytic examination of the moderator effects of job complexity on the criterion validity of the FFM of personality as assessed with forced-choice inventories. In accordance with the hypotheses, the results showed that job complexity moderates negatively the validity of conscientiousness and emotional stability and that it moderates positively the validity of openness. The implications for personnel ion research and practice are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Salgado (2017a) found that openness to experience was a better predictor of job performance for high complexity level occupations.
“The findings also supported Hypothesis 2 because openness to experience was a better predictor of job performance for high complexity level occupations.”
From A Meta-analysis of the Relationship between Cognitive Intelligence and the Big Five Assessed by Quasi-Ipsative Forced-choice Personality Inventories: Implications for Predicting Job Performance (2025) · cites this paper as Salgado, 2017a
Salgado (2017a) found that agreeableness can be a valid and relevant predictor of job performance for medium complexity level occupations when assessed with a quasi-ipsative forced-choice inventory.
“This meta-analysis also showed that agreeableness can be a valid and relevant predictor of job performance for medium complexity level occupations when this personality factor is assessed with a QIFC.”
From A Meta-analysis of the Relationship between Cognitive Intelligence and the Big Five Assessed by Quasi-Ipsative Forced-choice Personality Inventories: Implications for Predicting Job Performance (2025) · cites this paper as Salgado, 2017a
Salgado and Táuriz (2014), Salgado et al. (2015), Salgado (2017a), and Fisher et al. (2019) found a corrected validity of .39 for conscientiousness.
“Salgado and Tauriz (2014), Salgado et al. (2015), Salgado (2017a) and Fisher et al. (2019) found a corrected validity of .39.”
From A Meta-analysis of the Relationship between Cognitive Intelligence and the Big Five Assessed by Quasi-Ipsative Forced-choice Personality Inventories: Implications for Predicting Job Performance (2025) · cites this paper as Salgado, 2017a
Salgado (2017a) found that the criterion validity of emotional stability and conscientiousness was larger for occupations with lower levels of job complexity than for occupations with high job complexity.
“The results have supported Hypothesis 1, as the criterion validity of emotional stability and conscientiousness was larger for occupations with lower levels of job complexity than for the occupations with high job complexity.”
From A Meta-analysis of the Relationship between Cognitive Intelligence and the Big Five Assessed by Quasi-Ipsative Forced-choice Personality Inventories: Implications for Predicting Job Performance (2025) · cites this paper as Salgado, 2017a
Cites
A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance.
Poropat, A. E. (2009) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0014996 · Cited by 2,729 · see citing works
PREDICTORS OF OBJECTIVE AND SUBJECTIVE CAREER SUCCESS: A META‐ANALYSIS
NG, T. W. H., EBY, L. T., SORENSEN, K. L., & FELDMAN, D. C. (2005) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00515.x · Cited by 2,412 · see citing works
Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00160 · Cited by 2,356 · see citing works
Judge, T. A., Rodell, J. B., Klinger, R. L., Simon, L. S., & Crawford, E. R. (2013) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0033901 · Cited by 482 · see citing works
Salgado, J. F., & Táuriz, G. (2014) · European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1080/1359432x.2012.716198 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Increasing Validity with Forced-Choice Criterion Measurement Formats
Bartram, D. (2007) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00386.x · Cited by 132 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kreitchmann, R. S., Abad, F. J., Ponsoda, V., Nieto, M. D., & Morillo, D. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02309 · Cited by 269 · see citing works
Otero, I., Cuadrado, D., & Martínez, A. (2020) · Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones · doi:10.5093/jwop2020a17 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Martínez, A., Salgado, J. F., & Lado, M. (2022) · Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones · doi:10.5093/jwop2022a16 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Self-citationMartínez, A., Lado, M., Cuadrado, D., & Salgado, J. F. (2025) · Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.5093/jwop2025a3 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Salgado, J. F.
- Affiliations
- Universidade de Santiago de Compostela (ES)
- Corresponding author
- Salgado, Jesús F.
- ORCID
- Salgado, Jesús F.
- Venue
- Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones
- Published
- 2017
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 229-239
- ISSN
- 1576-5962 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2753699189
- Cited by
- 75
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 18.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- es
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Hispana (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Repositorio institucional da Universidade de Santiago de Compostela (University of Santiago de Compostela) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Keywords
- job complexity, criterion validity, Big Five personality traits, personality tests, job performance prediction, conscientiousness, emotional stability, openness to experience, moderator effects
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
