Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Advances in Game-Like Personality Assessment

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Trends in Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Game-like personality assessment has been introduced as a way to minimize presentation bias and careless responding. In this paper, the game-like personality measure (GPM), a personality assessment embedded within a narrative decision-based adventure, is iterated and extended from proof of concept to construct valid measure. The revised game was given to a large volunteer sample along with a traditional personality measure. The current iteration of the GPM has stable and consistent correlations with a traditional personality inventory. The GPM is further vetted for convergent validity beyond the Big 5, and the evidence of adequate construct validity and participant enjoyment are presented. We discuss the theoretical and practical trade-offs of such a measure and how GPM can advance personnel assessment through further iteration and experimentation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of Data and Material

All data is available at https://osf.io/8v6rt/ The GPM used in this paper is available on the first authors website.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. In the ipsative version of the measure (GPM-I; McCord et al. studies 1 and 2), this item assesses whether the subject is most dominant in the expression of extraversion (E), conscientiousness (C), or openness to experience (O) with the following choice options: “Use the communication device to say hello and introduce yourself (E)”; “Formulate a contingency plan for escape and then approach the figure (C)”; and “Pause a moment to try to read its body language before stepping forward to approach the figure (O).”.

  2. All results reported remain consistent when controlling for gender.

  3. A secondary random parcel was performed and results did not change.

  4. Because this single factor CFA is a simple model, we did not parcel for the individual CFAs.

  5. Fit scores are extreme here because the obtained χ2 was less than the degrees of freedom.

  6. With the exception of extroversion, all other trait measures had acceptable single factor CFAs; O—χ2(9) = 7.87, p. = 0.548; E—χ2(9) = 20.4, p. = 0.016; A—χ2(9) = 6.4, p. = 0.697; N—χ2(9) = 6.2, p. = 0.72.

  7. Pages describing the results of previous studies posted on the subreddit received more upvotes than the study post.

References

  • Arias, V. B., Garrido, L. E., Jenaro, C., & Arias, B. (2020). A little garbage in, lots of garbage out: Assessing the impact of careless responding in personality survey data. Behavioral Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01401-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9(1–2), 9–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaik, J. (2019). Game-based assessment for high-stakes personnel selection. Minneapolis, MN: Paper presented at the Game-Based Assessment workshop.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callan, R. C., Bauer, K. N., & Landers, R. N. (2015). How to avoid the dark side of gamification: Ten business scenarios and their unintended consequences. In Gamification in education and business (pp. 553–568). Springer, Cham.

  • Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell-Sills, L., & Stein, M. B. (2007). Psychometric analysis and refinement of the Connor-Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC): Validation of a 10-item measure of resilience. Journal of Traumatic Stress: Official Publication of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, 20(6), 1019–1028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cokely, E. T., Galesic, M., Schulz, E., Ghazal, S., & Garcia-Retamero, R. (2012). Measuring risk literacy: The Berlin numeracy test. Judgment and Decision making.

  • Cokely, E. T., Feltz, A., Ghazal, S., Allan, J. N., Petrova, D., & Garcia-Retamero, R. (2018). Decision making skill: From intelligence to numeracy and expertise. Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance, 476–505.

  • Dalal, R. S., Meyer, R. D., Bradshaw, R. P., Green, J. P., Kelly, E. D., & Zhu, M. (2015). Personality strength and situational influences on behavior: A conceptual review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 41(1), 261–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalal, R. S., Meyer, R. D., Jose, I. J., Hermida, R., Vega, R. P., Chen, T. R., Hale, A., & Brooks, C. K. (2012). Dissecting situational strength: Theoretical analysis and empirical tests (No. USARIBSS-1315). Fairfax, VA: George Mason Univ.

  • Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. C. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harman, J. L., & Brown, K. (2022). Illustrating a narrative: A test of game elements in game-like personality assessment. International Journal of Selection and Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harman, J. L. (2022). Game-like personality measures reduce faking and careless responding [Poster presentation]. Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Seattle, WA, U.S.

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huotari, K., Hamari, J. (2011). “Gamification” from the perspective of service marketing. Proceedings of the CHI 2011 Gamification Workshop, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

  • Landers, R. N. (2014). Developing a theory of gamified learning: Linking serious games and gamification of learning. Simulation & Gaming, 45(6), 752–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landers, R. N., & Callan, R. C. (2011). Casual social games as serious games: The psychology of gamification in undergraduate education and employee training. In M. Ma, A. Oikonomou, & L. Jain (Eds.), Serious games and edutainment applications (pp. 399–423). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J., & Zhang, J. (2020). An item-level analysis for detecting faking on personality tests: Appropriateness of ideal point item response theory models. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 3090. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03090

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2004). What should we do about motivation theory? Six recommendations for the twenty-first century. Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 388–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCord, J. L., Harman, J. L., & Purl, J. (2019). Game-like personality testing: An emerging mode of personality assessment. Personality and Individual Differences, 143(2019), 95–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52(5), 509–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, R. D., Dalal, R. S., & Hermida, R. (2010). A Review and Synthesis of Situational Strength in the Organizational Sciences. Journal of Management, 36(1), 121–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309349309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motowidlo, S. J., & Beier, M. E. (2010). Differentiating specific job knowledge from implicit trait policies in procedural knowledge measured by a situation judgment test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 321–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motowidlo, S. J., Hooper, A. C., & Jackson, H. L. (2006). Implicit policies about relations between personality traits and behavioral effectiveness in situational judgment items. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 749–761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mussel, P., Gatzka, T., & Hewig, J. (2018). Situational Judgment Tests as an Alternative Measure for Personality Assessment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 34(5), 328–335. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olaru, G., Burrus, J., MacCann, C., Zaromb, F. M., Wilhelm, O., & Roberts, R. D. (2019). Situational Judgment Tests as a method for measuring personality: Development and validity evidence for a test of Dependability. PLoS ONE, 14(2), e0211884. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211884

  • Oshio, A., Taku, K., Hirano, M., & Saeed, G. (2018). Resilience and Big Five personality traits: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 127, 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.01.048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shatz, I. (2017). Fast, free, and targeted: Reddit as a source for recruiting participants online. Social Science Computer Review, 35(4), 537–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclare, A. (2019). Developing games to measure personality: It’s not all fun and games! Paper presented at the game-based assessment workshop, Minneapolis, MN.

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • The jamovi project (2020). jamovi (Version 1.2) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from https://www.jamovi.org

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803, USA

    Jason L. Harman

  2. Human Resources Research Organization, Alexandria, VA, USA

    Justin Purl

Authors
  1. Jason L. Harman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Justin Purl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason L. Harman.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

Ethics approval was obtained through the LSU IRB. # E12315.

Consent to Participate

Consent was obtained from all participants.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Harman, J.L., Purl, J. Advances in Game-Like Personality Assessment. Trends in Psychol. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-022-00162-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-022-00162-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation