Premium
Specification of Scales in Biodata Form Development: Rational vs. Empirical and Global vs. Specific
Author(s) -
Stokes Garnett S.,
Searcy Cynthia A.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
international journal of selection and assessment
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.812
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1468-2389
pISSN - 0965-075X
DOI - 10.1111/1468-2389.00108
Subject(s) - psychology , empirical research , personality , social psychology , scale (ratio) , field (mathematics) , empirical evidence , applied psychology , epistemology , statistics , mathematics , philosophy , physics , quantum mechanics , pure mathematics
Although empirical keying has been the most popular scoring strategy with biodata, researchers have increasingly argued that rational approaches are better for advancing theory. Higher validities and less faking with empirical keys, however, have made many reluctant to abandon them. Research in the personality field provided support for the notion that many rational biodata scales may be multi‐faceted. Development of more specific scales was suggested as a technique for creating rational scales with validities that more closely approximate that of empirical keys. Three different strategies (rational, internal, and external/empirical) were used in the scoring of a biodata inventory for use with mechanical equipment franchise owners. The rational and internal approaches were investigated within two samples and at two levels ‐ very specific constructs and global constructs. In addition, two types of criteria were used, including an objective measure of sales and supervisory performance ratings. The specific rational scales were as predictive as the empirical item key. Strategies for developing and scoring a biodata form using a rational approach are discussed.