In this chapter we have reviewed the growing use of online testing, reflecting the increase of internet usage and candidates’ acceptance of this form of organizational engagement. While research in this area remains relatively sparse in comparison to other areas of organizational psychology, an increasing number of papers published since 2000 have helped deepen our understanding of the application and impact of this method as a potential tool to be used in the recruiters’ armoury. In the previous section of this chapter we set out some of the gaps in our knowledge and how research studies may help continue to develop our knowledge in the coming years.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association and National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: AERA.
American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. www.apa.org/ethics/code/principles.pdf. Last accessed 17 June 2015.
Ariely, D. (2008). Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions. New York: HarperCollins.
Arthur, W., Jr., Glaze, R. M., Jarrett, S. M., White, C. D., Schurig, I., & Taylor, J. E. (2014). Comparative evaluation of three situational judgment test response formats in terms of construct-related validity, subgroup differences, and susceptibility to response distortion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 535-545.
Arthur, W. A. R. M., Villado, A. J., & Taylor, J. E. (2009). Unproctored internet-based tests of cognitive ability and personality: Magnitude of cheating and distortion. Journal of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2, 39-45.
Arthur, W., Woehr, D. J., & Graziano, W. G. (2000). Personality testing in employment settings: Problems and issues in the application of typical selection practices. Personnel Review, 30, 657-676.
Baron, H. (1996). Strengths and limitations of ipsative instruments. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 49-56.
Baron, H., Martin, T., Proud, A., Weston, K., & Elshaw, C. (2003). Ethnic group differences and measuring cognitive ability. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 18, 191-238.
Bartram, D. (1996). The relationship between ipsatized and normative measures of personality. British Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 25-39.
Bartram, D. (2000). Internet recruitment and selection: Kissing frogs to find princes. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8, 261-274.
Bartram, D. (2008a). Global norms? Towards some guidelines for aggregating personality norms across countries. International Journal of Testing, 8(4), 315-333.
Bartram, D. (2008b). The advantages and disadvantages of on-line testing. In S. Cartwright & C. Cooper (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Personnel Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bartram, D. (2013a). Scalar equivalence of OPQ32: Big Five profiles of 31 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(1), 61-83.
Bartram, D. (2013b). A cross-validation of between country differences in personality using the OPQ32. International Journal of Quantitative Research in Education, 1, 182-211.
Bartram, D., & Burke, E. (2013). Industrial/organizational testing case studies. In J. A. Wollack & J. J. Fremer (Eds.), Handbook of Test Security (pp. 313-332). New York: Routledge.
Bartram, D., Warr, P., & Brown, A. (2010). Let’s focus on two-stage alignment not just on overall performance. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 335-339.
Beaty, J. C., Nye, C., Borneman, M., Kantrowitz, T. M., Drasgow, F., & Grauer, E. (2011). Proctored versus unproctored internet tests: Are unproctored tests as predictive of job performance? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19, 1-10.
Brown, A., & Bartram, D. (2009). Doing less but getting more: Improving forced-choice measures with IRT. Paper presented at the 24th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2-4 April, New Orleans, LA.
Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2011). Item response modelling of forced-choice questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 460-502.
Buchanan. T., & Smith J. L. (1999). Using the internet for psychological research: Personality testing on the world wide web. British Journal of Psychology, 90(1), 125-144.
Burke, E. (2006). Better Practice for Online Assessment. Thames Ditton, UK: SHL. www.shl.com/SHL/ en-int/Thought_Leadership/White_Papers/White-Papers.aspx. Last accessed 28 July 2008.
Burke, E. (2009). Preserving the integrity of online testing. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2, 35-38.
Burke, E., Mahoney-Phillips, Bowler, W., & Downey, K. (2011). Going online with assessment: Putting the science of assessment to the test of client need and 21st-century technologies. In N. T. Tippins & S. Adler (Eds.), Technology-enhanced Assessment of Talent. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chuah, S. C., Drasgow, F., & Roberts, B. W. (2006). Personality assessment: Does the medium matter? No. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 359-376.
Cizek, G. J. (1999). Cheating on Tests: How To Do It, Detect It, and Prevent It. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Christiansen, N. D., Burns, G. N., & Montgomery, G. E. (2005). Reconsidering the use of forced- choice formats for applicant personality assessment. Human Performance, 18, 267-307.
Davey, T., & Nering, M. (2002). Controlling item exposure & maintaining item security. In C. G. Mills, M. T. Potenza, J. J. Fremer & Ward, W. C. (Eds.), Computer-based Testing: Building The Foundation for Future Assessments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dwight, S. A., & Fiegelson, M. E. (2000). A quantitative review of the effect computerized testing on measurement of social desirability. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 340-360.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Civil Service Commission, Department of Labor, and Department of. (1978). Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures. Federal Register.
European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations. (2013). EFPA Review Model for the Description and Evaluation of Psychological and Educational Tests Version 4.2.6. www.efpa.eu/professional- development/assessment. Last accessed 17 June 2015.
Foster, D. F. (2013). Security issues in technology-based testing. In J. A. Wollack & J. J. Fremer (Eds.), Handbook of Test Security (pp. 39-84). New York: Routledge.
Foster, D. F., Mattoon, N., & Shearer, R. (2009). Using multiple online security measures to deliver secure course exams to distance education students: A white paper. kryteriononline.com/de_dl.htm.
Griffith, R. L., Chmielowski, T., & Yoshita, Y. (2007). Do applicants fake? An examination of the frequency of applicant faking behavior. Personnel Review, 36, 341-355.
Griffith, R. L., & McDaniel, M. (2006). The nature of deception and applicant faking behavior. In R. L. Griffith & M. H. Peterson (Eds.), A Closer Examination of Applicant Faking Behavior (pp. 1-19). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Griffith, R. L., & Peterson, M. H. (Eds.) (2006). A Closer Examination of Faking Behavior. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Hawkes, B. (2013). Developing evidence-based guidelines for testing on mobile devices. In C. Hedricks (Chair), Goin’ Mobile: Employers, Applicants, and Their References. Practitioner forum conducted at the 28 th Annual Conference of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Houston, TX.
He, J., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2013). A general response style factor: Evidence from a multi-ethnic study in The Netherlands. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 794-800.
Hense, R., Golden, J., & Burnett, J. (2009). Making the case for unproctored internet testing: Do the rewards outweigh the risks? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2, 20-23.
Hoffman, E. (2000). Ace the Corporate Personality Test. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hollinger R., & Lanza-Kaduce, L. (1996). Academic dishonesty and the perceived effectiveness of countermeasures. NASPA Journal, 33, 292-306.
Hough, L. M., & Schneider, R. J. (1996). Personality traits taxonomies and applications in organizations. In K. R. Murphy (Ed.), Individual Differences and Behavior in Organizations (pp. 31-88). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hui, C. H., & Triandis, H. C. (1989). Effects of culture and response format on extreme response style. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 20, 296-309.
Illingsworth, A. J., Morelli, N. A., Scott, J. C., & Boyd, S. L. (2015). Internet-based, unproctored assessments on mobile and non-mobile devices: Usage, measurement equivalence, and outcomes. Journal of Business Psychology, 30, 325-343.
International Standards Organization. (2011). ISO-10667-2 Assessment service delivery - Procedures and Methods to Assess People in Work and Organizational Settings. www.iso.org/iso/iso_ catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=56436. Last accessed 7 June 2015.
International Task Force on Assessment Center Guidelines. (2009). Guidelines and ethical considerations for assessment center operations. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 243-253.
International Test Commission. (2001). International guidelines for test use, International Journal of Testing, 1, 93-114.
International Test Commission. (2005). ITC Guidelines for Translating and Adapting Tests. www. intestcom.org/upload/sitefiles/40.pdf. Last accessed 19 January 2015.
International Test Commission. (2006). International guidelines on computer-based and Internet delivered testing. International Journal of Testing, 6, 143-172.
International Test Commission. (2014). International guidelines on the security of tests, examinations and other assessments. Document reference ITC-G-TS-20140706. www.intestcom.org/Guidelines/ Test+Security.php.
Jackson, D. N., Wroblewski, V. R., & Ashton, M. C. (2000). The impact of faking on employment tests: Does forced-choice offer a solution? Human Performance, 13(4), 371-388.
Kaminski, K. A., & Hemingway, M. A. (2009). To proctor or not to proctor? Balancing business needs with validity in online assessment. Industrial and Organizational Psychology; Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2, 24-26.
Kantrowitz, T. (2014). 2014 Global Assessment Trends Report. Thames Ditton, UK: CEB SHL.
Kantrowitz, T. M., & Dainis, A. M. (2014). How secure are unproctored pre-employment tests? Analysis of inconsistent test scores. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, 605-616.
Lautenschlager, G. J., & Flaherty, V. L. (1990). Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more social desirability? Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 310-314.
Levashina, J., Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2009). They don’t do it often, but they do it well: Exploring the relationship between applicant mental abilities and faking. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 271-281.
Lievens, F., & Burke, E. (2011). Dealing with the threats inherent in unproctored internet testing of cognitive ability: Results from a large-scale operational test program. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84, 817-824.
Lievens, F., & Harris, M. M. (2003). Research on internet recruiting and testing: Current status and future directions. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 18, 131-163.
Martin, B. A., Bowen, C. C., & Hunt, S. T. (2002). How effective are people at faking on personality questionnaires? Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 247-256.
Martin, C. L., & Nagao, D. H. (1989). Some effects of computerized interviewing on job applicant responses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 72-80.
Maynes, D. (2009). Combining statistical evidence for increased power in detecting cheating. caveon.com/articles/Combining_Statistical_Evidence_for_Increased_Power_in_Detecting_ Cheating_2009_Apr_04.pdf.
McCloy, R., Heggestad, E., & Reeve, C. (2005). A silk purse from the sow’s ear: Retrieving normative information from multidimensional forced-choice items. Organizational Research Methods, 8, 222-248.
Mead, A. W., Michels, L. C., & Lautenschlager, G. J. (2007). Are internet and paperandpencil personality tests truly comparable? An experimental design measurement invariance study. Organizational Research Methods, 10, 322-345.
Mitchel, D., & Blair, M. (2013). Goin’ mobile. A mobile provider’s foray into mobile assessments. In C. Hedricks (Chair), Goin’ mobile: Employers, Applicants, and Their References. Practitioner forum presented at the 28th Annual Conference of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Houston, TX.
Morelli, N. A., Illingworth, A. J., Scott, J. C., & Lance, C. E. (2012). Are internet-based, unproc- tored assessments on mobile and non-mobile devices equivalent? In J. C. Scott (Chair), Chasing the Tortoise: Zeno’s Paradox in Technology-based Assessment. Symposium presented at the 27th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego, CA.
Morelli, N. A., Mahan, R. P., & Illingworth, A. J. (2014). Establishing the measurement equivalence of online selection assessments delivered on mobile versus nonmobile devices. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 22, 124-138.
Nye, C. D., Do, B., Drasgow, F., & Fine, S. (2008). Two-step testing in employee selection: Is score inflation a problem? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 16, 112-120.
Ones, D. S., & Viswesveran, C. (1998). The effects of social desirability and faking on personality and integrity assessment for personnel selection. Human Performance, 11, 245-269.
Ones, D. S., & Viswesveran, C. (2001). Integrity tests and other criterion-focused occupational personality scales (COPS) used in personnel selection. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 31-39.
Ployhart, R. E., Weekley, J. A., Holtz, B. C., & Kemp, C. (2003). Web-based and paperandpencil testing of applicants in a proctored setting: Are personality, biodata, and situational judgment tests comparable? Personnel Psychology, 56, 733-752.
Poortinga, Y. H. (1989). Equivalence of cross-cultural data: An overview ofbasic issues. International Journal of Psychology, 24, 737-756.
Potosky, D., & Bobko, P. (1997). Computer versus paperandpencil mode and response distortion in noncognitive selection tests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 293-299.
Richman, W. L., Kiesler, S., Weisband, S., & Drasgow, F. (1999). A meta-analytic study of social desirability distortion in computer-administered questionnaires, traditional questionnaires, and interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 754-777.
Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S. (2003). Internet-based personality testing: Equivalence of measures and assessees’ perceptions and reactions. International Journal ofSelection and Assessment, 11, 194-205.
Sellman, W. S. (1991). Computer adaptive testing: Psychometrics, economics, and politics. Keynote address presented to the Workshop on Computer-Based Assessment of Military Personnel, April. NATO Defence Research Group, Brussels, Belgium.
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. (2003). Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures (4th ed.). Bowling Green, OH: SIOP.
Stokes, G. S., Mumford, M. D., & Owens, M. A. (1994). Biodata Handbook: Theory, Research, and Use of Biographical Information in Selection and Performance Prediction. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Tate, L., & Hughes, D. (2007). To cheat or not to cheat: Candidates’ perceptions and experiences of unsupervised computer-based testing. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Division of Occupational Psychology of the British Psychological Society, January, Bristol.
Tett, R. P., Anderson, M. G., Ho, C., Yang, T. S., Huang, L., & Hanvongse, A. (2006). Seven nested questions about faking on personality tests: An overview and interactionist model of item-level response distortion. In R. Griffith & M. H. Peterson (Eds.), A Closer Examination of Applicant Eaking Behavior. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Tippins, N. T. (1992). Realizing cost savings through more efficient selection testing. Paper presented at the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, May. Montreal.
Tippins, N. T. (2008). Internet Testing: Current Issues, Research Solutions, Guidelines, and Concerns. Symposium presented at the annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, April. San Francisco.
Tippins, N. T. (2009a). Internet alternatives to traditional proctored testing: Where are we now? Industrial and Organizational Psychology; Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2, 2-10.
Tippins, N. T. (2009b). Where is the unproctored internet testing train headed now? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2, 69-76.
Tippins, N. T. (2015). Technology and assessment in selection. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 5.1-5.32.
Tippins, N. T., Beatty, J., Drasgow, F., Gibson, W. M., Pearlman, K., Segall, D. O., & Shepherd, W.
(2006). Unproctored internet testing in employment settings. Personnel Psychology, 59, 189-225. van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and Data Analysis of Comparative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Vasilopoulos, N. L., Cucina, J. M., Dyomina, N. V., Morewitz, C. L., & Reilly, R. R. (2006). Forced-choice personality tests: A measure of personality or cognitive ability? Human Performance, 19, 175-199.
Viswesveran, C., & Ones, D. S. (1999). Meta-analysis of fakeability estimates: Implications for personality measurement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 197-210.
Warr, P., Bartram, D., & Martin, T. (2005). Personality and sales performance: Situational variation and interactions between traits. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 87-91. Waters, B. K. (1997). Army alpha to CAT-ASVAB: Four score years of military selection and classification testing. In R. F. Dillion (Ed.), Handbook on Testing (pp. 164-186). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Wise, L. L., Curran, L. T., & McBride, J. R. (1997). CAT-ASVAB cost and benefit analyses. In W. A. Sands, B. K. Waters & J. R. McBride (Eds.), Computerized Adaptive Testing: From Inquiry to Operation (pp. 227-236). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.