Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Sackett and M. M. Harris (1984) reviewed published and unpublished literature on the use of commercially available paper‐and‐pencil integrity tests for employee selection. This paper reviews recent developments in this area. Legal issues related to the use of the polygraph, and integrity tests are discussed. Empirical research on the reliability, criterion‐related validity, construct validity, fakability, and adverse impact of integrity tests is reviewed. Major changes since the previous review include (1) the emergence of two distinct types of tests, labeled overt integrity tests and personality‐oriented measures, (2) a broadening of the criteria used for test validation to include global performance, absence, turnover, and forms of counterproductivity other than theft, and (3) an increase in the use of external criteria (e.g., detected theft, turnover) rather than self‐report criteria (e.g., admissions of theft) in validation research. Difficulties in interpreting research findings and practical constraints on the use of integrity tests are discussed.
Sackett et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: