NCJ Number
80785
Journal
Security Management Volume: 26 Issue: 1 Dated: (January 1982) Pages: 41-47
Date Published
1982
Length
7 pages
Annotation
Procedures for testing a job applicant's honesty are described and assessed.
Abstract
Straightforward questions about an applicant's honesty in past jobs is one of the least expensive methods for testing an applicant's honesty. The initial development of a polygraphy test, which is most effective when oriented toward the particular company's environment, is the most expensive aspect. The primary problem with these direct-method tests is that they can be easily faked. Polygraphing, which is basically a tool for detecting liars, is the most expensive testing method on a per person basis. The following are suggested as steps for reducing problems in typical polygraph tests where a large number of people are asked the same question: (1) tape the question ahead of time so an examiner's inflection cannot bias the respondent; (2) determine which involuntary reactions are the most responsive for each individual during a pretest session; (3) measure the differential response to critical versus neutral questions along the most responsive reaction channels; (4) translate this differential response to a yes-no decision, with a predetermined false alarm rate. The psychological stress evaluation focuses on the vocal tract as a way of detecting lying. The test is limited by its narrow reactive focus and sparse research on its validity. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and the California Psychological Inventory (CPI) constitute an indirect method of honesty detection. The MMPI is best for screening applicants when concern for severe maladjustment is primary, and the CPI is best for measuring interpersonal skills for high visibility jobs. The securing of background data on employees can be helpful in identifying certain problem areas. The pros and cons of the aforementioned methods for measuring honesty are summarized in an exhibit.