Abstract
Personality testing has become a controversial issue in employee selection, especially regarding applicant reactions. In this study, 105 undergraduate students from a western university imagined they were applicants for a job and provided their reactions to work-specific
and nonwork-specific versions of a personality test along three rating dimensions. Four 2x3x2 complex mixed designs were conducted; analysis for each of four personality domains. The between subjects variable was type of survey (nonwork-specific and work-specific). One within-subjects variable was rating dimension (invasiveness, fakability, and job relatedness) and the other was item wording (positive and negative). Hypothesized effects of the work frame-of-reference manipulation on perceived invasiveness, fakability and job relatedness were not found; however, a consistent pattern of differences was found between positively and negatively worded statements for each personality construct. Implications regarding applicant reactions to personality-based employment tests are discussed.