MOTIVATIONAL COMPONENTS OF TEST TAKING
Abstract
The first phase of this research effort describes an effort to directly measure the attitudes and opinions of employment test takers toward the tests they just took; the instrument is called the Test Attitude Survey (TAS). Nine factors were developed which reflect test takers' expressed effort and motivation on the test, the degree of concentration, perceived test ease, and the like. Several studies were conducted showing that TAS factors were significantly sensitive to differences in test types and administration permitting the inference that the TAS possessed construct validity. The second phase of this study tested several propositions and hypotheses. In one study, it is shown that the applicants report significantly higher effort and motivation on the employment tests compared to incumbents, even when ability is held constant. A second study showed that a small but significant relationship exists between TAS factor scores, test performances, and the person factors. Moreover, some of the racial differences on test performances can be accounted for via the TAS factor scores; it is observed that after holding these TAS factors constant, racial differences on the employment tests scores diminished. In a third study, very limited evidence was found for the incremental and moderating effects of these attitudes, but there were several limitations to the study associated with small sample sizes, unknown reliabilities in the criterion scales, and so forth. Discussion focussed on t…
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?
Studies have shown that Black people have lower motivation and face validity perceptions in testing.
“Studies have shown that Black people have lower motivation and face validity perceptions in testing (Arvey et al., 1990)”
From Factors Related to Mean Score Group Differences on Cognitive Ability Tests: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as Arvey et al., 1990
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Review of Scale Development Practices in the Study of Organizations
Hinkin, T. R. (1995) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639502100509 · Cited by 3,193 · see citing works
The Perceived Fairness of Selection Systems: An Organizational Justice Perspective
Gilliland, S. W. (1993) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258595 · Cited by 1,185 · see citing works
Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: an overview
van de Vijver, F., & Tanzer, N. K. (2004) · European Review of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.erap.2003.12.004 · Cited by 1,097 · see citing works
Applicant Reactions to Selection Procedures: An Updated Model and Meta‐Analysis
Hausknecht, J. P., Day, D. V., & Thomas, S. C. (2004) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00003.x · Cited by 816 · see citing works
Reconsidering forced-choice item formats for applicant personality assessment
Christiansen, N. D., Burns, G. N., & Montgomery, G. E. (2005) · Human Performance · doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1803_4 · Cited by 250 · see citing works
Sackett, P. R., Borneman, M. J., & Connelly, B. S. (2008) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.63.4.215 · Cited by 233 · see citing works
VAN IDDEKINGE, C. H., & PLOYHART, R. E. (2008) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00133.x · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Converse, P. D., Oswald, F. L., Imus, A., Hedricks, C., Roy, R., & Butera, H. (2008) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2008.00420.x · Cited by 78 · see citing works
McCarthy, J. M., & Goffin, R. D. (2005) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2005.00325.x · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Nguyen, H.-H. D., O'Neal, A., & Ryan, A. M. (2003) · Human Performance · doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1603_5 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
McKay, P. F., Doverspike, D., Bowen-Hilton, D., & McKay, Q. D. (2003) · Journal of Business and Psychology · doi:10.1023/a:1025062703113 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Motivation, Test Scores, and Economic Success
Segal, C. (2009) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1374222 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Konradt, U., Ellwart, T., & Gevers, J. (2021) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102003 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Factors Related to Mean Score Group Differences on Cognitive Ability Tests: A Systematic Review
Cuppello, S., Zibarras, L. D., & Corr, P. J. (2025) · Trends in Psychology · doi:10.1007/s43076-025-00504-5
- Authors
- ARVEY, R. D., STRICKLAND, W., DRAUDEN, G., & MARTIN, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- United States Air Force (US)
- United States Department of the Navy (US)
- Corresponding author
- ARVEY, RICHARD D.
- Venue
- Personnel Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1990-12
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 695-716
- ISSN
- 0031-5826 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-6570
- OpenAlex
- W2087095639
- Cited by
- 324
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 4.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Personnel Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Keywords
- test-taking motivation, employment testing, test effort, test concentration, construct validity, incremental validity
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