성격 측정에서 우세반응 모형과 이상점반응 모형의 비교 = Comparison between dominance process model and ideal point response model for personality assesment

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 성격 측정에 있어서 어떠한 측정모형이 가장 적합한지를 검증하기 위하여 고전검사이론과 우세(dominance) IRT 반응 모형, 이상점 모형(ideal point model)을 이용하여 성취지향, 공정성, 협조성, 진실성 등 네 차원의 문항들을 개발 및 선별하여 모형간 적합도를 비교하였다. 그 결과, 대체로 이상점 모형의 적합도가 우세 반응 모형보다 약간 더 높은 것으로 나오기는 하였지만 그 차이는 매우 미미하였다. 또한 진실성과 협조성 차원에 대해서는 두 모형으로 개발된 척도의 검사정보함수 간 차이는 거의 없었다. 준거 타당도를 살펴보기 위하여 세 가지 측정모형으로 개발된 네 차원 척도와 성적 간의 상관을 살펴본 결과 상관이 유의미하지는 않았지만 측정모형 간 차이는 거의 없었다. 논의에서는 본 연구의 결과 및 본 연구가 갖는 한계점, 산업 현장에서 갖는 의미에 대해서 살펴보았다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 유태용, "성격의 6요인(HEXACO) 모델에 의한 성격특성과 조직구성원 직무수행 간의 관계" 한국산업및조직심리학회 20 (20): 283-314, 2007

2 김명소, "성격검사의 형식이 응답왜곡(faking)에 미치는 효과:Normative 형식과 ipsative 형식의 비교" 한국산업및조직심리학회 19 (19): 371-393, 2006

3 이선희, "성격검사문항에 대한 이상점 반응 모형의 적용" 한국심리학회 27 (27): 839-857, 2008

4 이은정, "성격 검사의 응답왜곡 탐지: 직무 바람직성의 개념화 및 선발 결정에의 영향" 한국산업및조직심리학회 16 (16): 121-151, 2003

5 황지희, "대학생의 성취목표지향성과 학습전략 및 학업성취의 관계" 연세대학교 대학원 2007

6 유태용, "다양한 장면에서 수행을 예측하기 위한 5요인 성격모델의 사용가능성과 한계: 성격요인과 수행 간의 관계에 대한 통합분석" 14 (14): 115-134, 2001

7 안여명, "개인 및 팀 수준에서 성격과 적응수행 간의 관계: 일반적 자기효능감의 매개효과와 변혁적 리더십의 조절효과" 한국산업및조직심리학회 23 (23): 155-179, 2010

8 Roberts, J. S, "Validity issues in the Likert and Thurstone approaches to attitude measure-ment" 59 : 211-233, 1999

9 Simms, L. J, "Validation of computerized adaptive version of the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality(SNAP)l" 17 : 28-43, 2005

10 Marcus Crede, "Two Caveats for the Use of Ideal Point Items:Discrepancies and Bivariate Constructs" 3 : 494-497, 2010

11 Carter, N. T, "Toward Understanding the Psychology of Unfolding" 3 : 511-514, 2010

12 Reise,S.P, "Thurstone Might Have Been Right About Attitudes,but Drasgow,Chernyshenko,and Stark Fail to Make the Case for Personality" 3 : 485-488, 2010

13 Schmidt, F. L, "The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology:Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings" 124 : 262-274, 1998

14 McCrae, R. R, "The structure of interpersonal traits:Wiggins' circumflex and the five-factor model" 56 : 586-595, 1989

15 Ross, J. G, "The impact of response distortion on preemployment personality testing and hiring decisions" 83 : 634-644, 1998

16 Hough, L. M, "The frontiers of I/O Personality Research, In Individual differences & behavior in organizations" Jossey-Bass 31-88, 1996

17 Barrick, M. R, "The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance:A meta-analysis." 44 : 1-26, 1991

18 Edwards,J.R, "Ten difference score myths" 4 : 265-287, 2001

19 Drasgow, F, "Statistical power of differential validity and differential prediction analyses for detecting measurement nonequivalence" 69 : 498-508, 1984

20 Dalal, D, K, "Six Questions That Practitioners(Might)Have About Ideal Point Response Process Items" 3 : 498-501, 2010

21 Ones, D. S, "Role of social desirability in personality testing for personnel selection:The red herring" 81 : 660-679, 1996

22 Lake, C. J, "Respondent and test delivery characteristics that induce item unfolding"

23 Waples, C. J, "Questionable Defeats and Discounted Victories for Likert Rating Scales" 3 : 477-480, 2010

24 Nunnally, J. C, "Psychometric theory" McGraw-Hill 1994

25 Hurtz, G. M, "Personality and Job performance,The big five revisited" 85 : 869-879, 2000

26 Hogan, R, "Personality Measurement and employment decision:Questions and answers.American" 51 (51): 469-477, 1996

27 Davison,M.L, "On a metric,unidimensional unfolding model for attitudinal and developmental data" 42 : 523-548, 1977

28 Stark,S, "MODFIT: A computer program for model-data fit" University of Illinois at Urban-Champaign 2008

29 Brown, A, "Issues That Should Not Be Overlooked in the Dominance Versus Ideal Point Controversy" 3 : 489-493, 2010

30 "International Personality Item Pool"

31 O’Reilly, C. A, "Hidden value:How great companies achieve extraordinary results with ordinary people" Harvard Business School Press 2000

32 Reise, S. P, "Fitting the two-parameter model to personality data" 14 : 45-58, 1990

33 Drasgow, F, "Fitting polytomous item response theory models to multiple choice tests" 19 : 143-165, 1995

34 Chernyshenko, O. S, "Fitting item response theory models to two personality inventories:Issues and insights" 36 : 523-562, 2001

35 Tay, L, "Fitting Measurement Models to Vocational Interest Data:Are Dominance Models Ideal?" 94 (94): 1287-1394, 2009

36 Tay, L, "Fitting IRT Models to Dichotomous and Polytomous Data:Assessing the Relative Model-Data Fit of Ideal Point and Dominance Models" 35 (35): 280-295, 2011

37 Stark, S, "Examining assumptions about item responding in personality assessment:Should ideal point methods be considered for scale development" 91 : 25-39, 2006

38 Stark, S, "Effects of the testing situation on item responding:Cause for concern" 86 : 943-953, 2001

39 Oswald, D, "Developing and Scaling Personality Measures:Thurstone Was Right-But So Far,Likert Was Not Wrong" 3 : 481-484, 2010

40 Zickar, M. J, "Detecting faking on a personality instrument using approproatemess measurement" 20 : 71-87, 1996

41 Markon, K. E, "Delineating the structure of normal and abnormal personality:An integrative hierarchical approach" 88 : 139-157, 2005

42 Chernyshenko, O. S, "Constructing Personality Scales Under the Assumptions of an Ideal Point Response Process:Toward Increasing the Flexibility of Personality Measures" 19 (19): 88-06, 2007

43 Reise, S. P, "Computerization and adaptive administration of the NEO-PI-R" 7 : 347-364, 2000

44 Barclay, J. E, "Comparative reliabilities and ease of construction of Thurstone and Likert attitude scales" 68 : 109-120, 1962

45 Mislevy, R. J, "BILOG user’s guide" Scientific Software 1991

46 Thurstone,L.L, "Attitude can be measured" 33 : 529-554, 1928

47 Guion,R.M, "Assessment,measurement,and prediction for personnel decisions" Erlbaum 1998

48 Ellis, B. B, "An item response theory evaluation of an English version of the Trier Personality Inventory" 2 : 133-148, 1993

49 Carter, N. T, "An ideal point account of the JDI Work satisfaction scale" 49 : 743-748, 2010

50 Rouse, S. V, "Advances in clinical personality measurement:An item response theory analysis of the MMPI-2 PSY-5 scales" 72 : 282-307, 1999

51 Coombs,C.H, "A theory of data" Wiley 1964

52 Likert,R, "A technique for the measurement of attitudes" 91 : 25-39, 1932

53 Thurstone,L.L, "A law of comparative judgment" 44 : 703-742, 1927

54 Andrich,D, "A hyperbolic cosine latent trait model for unfolding polytomous responses:Reconciling Thurstone and Likert methodologies" 49 : 347-365, 1996

55 Roberts, J. S, "A general item response theory model for unfolding unidimensional polytomous responses" 24 : 3-32, 2000

56 Roberts,J.S, "A computer program fot GGUM 2004: Technical reference manual"

57 Edwards, A. L, "A comparison of the Thurstone and Likert techniques of attitude scale construction" 30 : 72-83, 1946

58 Goldberg, L. R, "A broad-bandwidth, public-domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models, In Personality psychology in Europe, 7" Tilburg University Press 7-28, 1997

59 Drasgow, F, "75 Years After Likert:Thurstone Was Right!" 3 : 515-520, 2010

60 유태용, "5요인 성격검사의 개발 및 타당화 연구" 10 (10): 85-102, 1995