MNO4717 Talent Acquisition

Transcript for Lesson 8

Assessment Methods IV: Integrity & Honesty Test

Definitions

Integrity refers to an individual’s steadfast adherence to (a) a strict moral code or ethical
principle, and (b) doing the right thing even when no one is watching.

Honesty refers to an individual’s (a) being truthful, sincere, and free of deceit, and (b) telling
only the truth regardless of the situation.

Integrity and honesty tests deserve special attention and treatment in talent assessment &
selection because they are designed to identify (and keep out) candidates who are likely to
engage in counterproductive work behaviours (CWBs).

 CWBs refer to a wide array of illegal/unethical purposeful employee conduct that

harms the organization/people, such as theft, dishonesty, fraud, illicit drug use,
alcohol abuse, vandalism, violence, cursing, sabotaging, purposely doing work
incorrectly, and instigating co-workers not to abide by company rules.

 By identifying and rejecting unsuitable candidates (who are low on

integrity/honesty), the personnel decision maker can save the employer from a lot of
problems (e.g., property damage & personal bodily/psychological injuries) that may
compromise the company’s operations, corporate image, profitability, and even
survivability.

 In day-to-day applications, decision makers typically do not make a difference

between integrity and honesty and these two terms are usually used
interchangeably.

Both integrity and honesty refer to an individual’s disposition (tendency) to think and act in
certain ways across situations and hence they are actually a special type of personality.

 Conceptual overlap exists between integrity/honesty and some personality traits

discussed in Lesson 7 in explaining some of the variances in individuals’ CWBs.

Trait conscientiousness, for example, has been found to be efficacious in predicting

CWBs (a higher level of conscientiousness is associated with lower levels of CWBs).

 As will be discussed further below, the key to ascertaining the effectiveness of

integrity/honesty tests is to demonstrate their incremental validity beyond other
predictors - such as the BIG-5 personality traits - in predicting (and pre-empting)
applicants’ future CWBs.

1
Conceptual Bases of Integrity/Honesty Test

An integrity/honesty test is premised on these assumptions:

1. A person who has "low integrity" should report more dishonest behaviours because
such information is more readily available;

2. Individuals who have "low integrity" would try to look for reasons in order to justify
what they have done, intend to do, or would avail to do;

3. A person who has "low integrity" would think others are more likely to commit
crimes when given a chance to think about the deviance of other people;

4. A person who has "low integrity" would exhibit impulsive behaviour (act without
thinking deeper); and

5. A person who has "low integrity" would tend to think that society/other people
should severely punish someone who has committed a deviant behaviour.

If any of the above assumptions is not true in reality, then the honesty/integrity test items
premised on the assumption would be defective and should not be used to measure the
applicant’s integrity/honesty.

A commonly used method to establish the usability of an integrity/honesty test item is to

administer the test instrument to a sample of respondents from two populations, one
comprising people who are known to have committed specific types of CWBs in question
(experimental group) and another, have not (control group).

 To be usable, the responses provided on the integrity/honesty test item by

respondents from the two groups must be different, such that the answers provided
by respondents in the experimental group should deviate from those in the control
group in the postulated direction.

 For example, in response to this question, “A thief has stolen a loaf of bread, how
long a jail sentence should the court impose? One day or one week?” Based on
assumption 5 as stated above, the experimental group is more likely to answer “one
week” and the control group, “one day”.

Of course, after the test instrument is constructed, real-world empirical data should be
collected to prove that job applicants who have answered “one week” to the above
question do subsequently commit more CWBs on the job after being hired compared to
those who have answered “one day” (predictive criterion-related validity).

Consistent with this line of reasoning, research has found that a typical employee-thief:

a. Is more tempted to steal.

2
 b. Engages in many common rationalizations for theft.

c. Would personally punish thieves less.

d. Often thinks about theft-related activities.

e. Attributes more theft to others.

f. Shows more inter-thief loyalty.

g. Is more vulnerable to peer pressure to steal.

Note that a score on an integrity/honesty test would point to a higher or lower likelihood of
CWB and should not be used to classify a specific test taker as belonging in one group or the
other and label them as such (e.g., thief vs non-thief) – even if the test taker has “passed” or
“failed” an integrity/honesty” test.

A high scorer (high-integrity applicant) may still subsequently commit CWBs (even though
the chance is lower) and a low scorer (low-integrity applicant) may actually turn out to be a
dependable employee (even though the chance is lower) after being hired.

It’s a matter of relative likelihood.

And because it is a matter of likelihood, low scorers can be advised to stay alert and take
special care not to fall prey to their innate/ingrained tendency to engage in CWBs even
when the “opportunity” arises or when the situation is “ripe”.

Approaches to Measuring Integrity/Honesty

There are two major test approaches commonly used to assess a test taker’s
integrity/honesty, namely:

A. Overt Integrity/Honesty Tests

These are self-report paper-and-pencil tests that ask subjects to directly share their prior
behaviours/attitudes concerning honesty, crime, drug use, theft, and the likes.

There are two subtypes of overt integrity/honesty tests that ask two different types of
questions:

(a) Attitude-Based (Opinion & Feeling) Tests

This subtype asks test takers to make statements or comments about their:

o Attitudes Towards Theft

3
 o Beliefs About Frequency of Theft

o Punishment of Theft

o Own Honesty

o Own Trustworthiness

For example: Do you (i.e., the test taker) think people believe that everyone can be
dishonest? How honest are you (the test taker)?

(b) Behaviour-Based (Intention & Acton) Tests

This subtype asks test takers to come clean with the type and amount of their actual
past behaviours concerning:

o Theft

o Sabotaging

o Other Illegal/Unethical Behaviours

For example: Have you (i.e., the test taker) thought of stealing something? What
have you (i.e., the test taker) stolen from past employers?

Examples of overt integrity test (attitude/behaviour-based) include:

1. Applicant Risk Profiler. This test inventory produces 6 scales, namely:

 Integrity Scale

 Illegal Drug Use Scale

 Workplace Policy Compliance Scale

 Workplace Aggression Scale

 Deception Scale

 Total Applicant Risk Profiler Score

This is an assessment designed to predict CWBs such as engaging in workplace

aggression, bringing drugs/weapons to work, and the likes.

This test can be completed in 20 minutes and contains 65 multiple choice questions.

4
 https://www.scribd.com/document/317940713/Applicant-Risk-Profiler-Test-
Manual-pdf

2. The Reid Report (30th Edition). This test inventory covers:

 Social Behaviour

 Substance Abuse

 Optimism

 Persistence

 Influence

 Valuing of Interpersonal Relationships

 Self-Restraint

 Willingness to Help Others

It assesses test takers’ attitudes about integrity, social behaviours, substance use,
and personal achievements by asking them to respond to 23 true-false attitudinal
items and 38 past-behaviour items.

Respondents are not asked to reveal their histories of legal convictions and the test
is focused on attitudes/behaviours strongly correlated with future performance.

The test can be completed in 15 minutes.

https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/doi/abs/10.1111/1468-
2389.00196

3. The Stanton Survey (Version 11.0). This test inventory assesses the tendency in an
individual to:

 Steal Merchandise

 Misuse Sick Leave

 Break Company Policy

 Give Unauthorized Discounts

This is a 15-minute test that has been in use for a long time and is efficacious in
helping employers reduce employee theft, absenteeism, involuntary terminations,
turnover, and policy violations.

5
 https://www.stantonsurvey.com/

A major challenge facing overt integrity/honesty tests based on test takers’

behaviour/attitude is their susceptibility to faking good.

 One way to detect this drawback is to conduct the same test using two different sets
of instructions for respondents at two time points and evaluate the test-retest
reliability of the test instrument.

 If the test-retest reliability cannot be established, then faking good would be a

problem and the test should not be used.

 Phase II Profile was one of the integrity/honesty test instruments that were
discontinued due to this problem:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2466/pr0.1990.67.1.291?
journalCode=prxa

B. Personality-Oriented Integrity/Honesty Tests

These tests include items measuring personality traits that have been shown to link to
CWBs, including:

o Dependability

o Social Conformity

o Thrill Seeking

o Conscientiousness (this trait is by far the best BIG-5 personality trait predictor of
performance)

For example, a test item may ask:

“Between these words, which describes you more accurately: Achievement Striving
or Thorough?”

The earlier would add weight to “Conscientiousness” and the latter would not.

The personality-trait approach to testing integrity/honesty has two advantages over the
overt testing approach:

o Items on a personality-based integrity test are not as transparent in their

intention to measure theft and related transgressions.

This reduces the possibility of fake responses.

6
 o Applicants who are not selected need not be rejected due to failing an integrity
test.

Rather, they are rejected for a mismatch between their personality profile and
that of successful employees.

Examples of personality-oriented integrity/honesty test include:

1. Personnel Reaction Blank: This is based on the California Psychological Inventory

and tests for dependability, conscientiousness, diligence, and self-restraint –
qualities needed to minimise CWBs.

It has 84 multiple-choice items that can be completed in less than 15 minutes and is
designed to predict whether a job applicant will exhibit dependable and reliable
workplace behaviour.

It produces five easy-to-interpret scales:

 Sense of Well-Being

 Positive Background Indicators

 Compliance with Rules and Routines

 Conventional Occupational Preferences

 Personal Reliability Index

https://patrickcnslab.psy.fsu.edu/wiki/images/1/18/
BlonigenETAL_PsychAssessment_2011.pdf

2. Employment Inventory: This is designed to identify applicants likely to become

productive and successful employees (the opposite of employees who are likely to
exhibit CWBs) in entry-level and non-exempt positions.

It comprises:

 Performance Scale

 Tenure Scale

 Customer Service Scale

 Sales Scale

7
 https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/doi/full/10.1111/j.1468-
2389.2007.00392.x

3. Hogan Personality Inventory: This test contains 206 true-or-false items to be taken
in 15 to 20 minutes.
https://www.hoganassessments.com/assessment/hogan-personality-inventory/

 The 206 items load on seven primary scales and six occupational scales for use in
employment situations. (See Textbook Table 14.1).

o The 7 primary scales are personality dimensions used to profile the test
taker, comprising:

 Adjustment

 Ambition

 Sociability

 Interpersonal Sensitivity

 Prudence

 Inquisitiveness

 Learning Approach

o The 6 occupational scales are drawn from various combinations of the 206
items loaded on the primary scales to provide information about specific
work-related characteristics of the test taker, comprising:

 Service Orientation

 Stress Tolerance

 Reliability

8
  Clerical Potential

 Sales Potential

 Managerial Potential

 Of particular interest is the Reliability occupational scale, which is composed of

18 items that measure honesty, integrity, and organizational citizenship
behaviour (employees go beyond contractual obligations to contribute to the
organization). (See Textbook Table 14.2 below).

High scores are good, low scores are not.

The criterion-related validity of the Reliability occupational scale is well-

established:

o The Reliability occupational scale has been negatively correlated with:

 Discharges from Work

 Grievances Filed

 Claims of Equipment Failure

 Times Counselled for Aberrant Behaviour

 Injuries Sustained

 Incidents Reported to Insurance Fund

 Government Grants Spent on Subsidising Treatment

 Absences

o The same scale has been positively associated with:

 Commendations

 Supervisor’s Ratings of Performance

 Supervisor’s Ratings of Attitude, Accuracy, & Punctuality

 Course Time Completion

 Supervisor’s Ratings of Quality, Teamwork, & Performance

 Sales Performance

9
  Sales Lead Generation

Establishing the Validity of Integrity/Honesty Testing

Transcript Exhibit 8.1 illustrates the usual check that the personnel decision maker should
conduct to ensure that the integrity/honesty test in use at the hiring organization is reliable
and valid.

Similar to the case of personality/values testing, the content validity of the

integrity/honesty test may not have been pre-established by the test developer for the user
organization because most of the commercially marketed integrity/honesty tests used by
the employer (for cost-effectiveness reasons) are not based on a representative sampling of
the content of the vacant job position in question.

 This, again, does not mean the hiring organization cannot adapt the
integrity/honesty test items to reflect closely the tasks, duties, responsibilities, and
working conditions of the vacant job position which the applicant is assessed for.

 If an adaptation to reflect the content of the vacant job position in question is indeed
done objectively, the content validity of the integrity/honesty test instrument may
be improved.

A study using test items from 3 overt and 4 personality-oriented integrity/honesty tests
concluded that:

 There were positive correlations between these 2 approaches to integrity/honesty

testing and they showed a great deal of similarity in what they measured
(equivalent-forms reliability).

 There were some differences, more specially, in that:

 Overt integrity/honesty tests correlated more highly with honesty and

supervision attitudes; and

10
  Personality-oriented integrity/honesty tests correlated more highly with
self/impulse control, home life/upbringing, risk taking, diligence, and emotional
stability (differences in construct validity).

These results suggest that the two approaches to measuring integrity/honesty may
gravitate to reflecting different factors (or facets/dimensions) of the
integrity/honesty construct (different subconstructs exist).

Determining the criterion-related validity of integrity/honesty tests is difficult because of

practical constraints in measuring criterion variables (e.g., actual stealing on the job) with
which to correlate integrity test scores.

A recent study (see the link below) found that integrity tests had significant incremental
validity beyond personality traits in predicting counter-productive work behaviours (CWBs)
and a substantial portion of this incremental validity can be attributed to the Honesty-
Humility facet of the HEXACO model of personality structure (i.e., correlated with the Big
Five personality model).

In addition, the best outcomes of predicting CWBs can be attained by using personality traits
and integrity tests simultaneously.

https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/doi/full/10.1002/cjas.1235

Textbook Table 14.3 compares two sets of meta-analyses of integrity/honesty test results
obtained from studies using job performance and CWBs as criterion measures.

The overall true criterion-related validity estimates are moderate and acceptable.

Based on the empirical evidence collected and scientific/managerial discourses on

integrity/honesty testing carried out in the past several decades, both researchers and

11
practitioners have agreed that integrity/honesty tests have a place in talent assessment and
selection and can be used to select or screen job applicants (face validity).

Usefulness & Defensibility of Integrity/Honesty Tests

A study by Harris et al revealed that the use of integrity/honesty testing in pre-employment

decision making would lead, on average, to a savings of over US$200k per 1,000 job
applicants for a typical organization in the US.

Several points deserve more attention:

 False Positives: In integrity/honesty testing, we try to identify applicants who are

reliable (i.e., less CWB-prone) and select them.

Similar to all other selection tests, integrity/honesty testing may produce false
positives (i.e., applicants judged to be low-CWB prone (high-integrity) at the point of
assessment actually engage in CWBs after being hired).

This is not unexpected because the integrity/honesty test score would point to a
higher or lower likelihood/proclivity of committing CWBs and not pinpoint whether
an applicant is a wrongdoer or a non-wrongdoer.

 Social Acceptance: The use of personality-based integrity tests may be more socially
acceptable than the use of overt measures due to the stigma or negative
connotation associated with “failing an integrity/honesty test” (sounds
incriminating) as opposed to “being profiled in a personality test (and a mismatch
has arisen)” (sounds more neutral).

 Faking: Research on faking in integrity/honesty tests has concluded that faking does
not seem to make a difference in the validity of the test.

 Legal Complaints: Harris et al observed that over a 60-year period, only about 30
formal complaints were filed in a court of law against integrity tests in the US.

All the complaints were dismissed, indicating that integrity tests do not elicit many
legal complaints and complaints involving such tests are likely to be defensible.

Other Integrity/Honesty Tests

Several other types of integrity/honesty tests are available to detect potential problematic
behaviours of job applicants and personnel decision makers should consider using them
with due care.

1. Drug/Alcohol Use Test:

 There are reasons for testing job applicants for alcohol/drug use or abuse, including:

12
 (a) Deter employees from abusing alcohol and drugs.

(b) Prevent hiring individuals who use illegal drugs.

(c) Provide a safe workplace for employees.

(d) Protect the general public and instil consumer confidence that employees are
working safely.

(e) Comply with laws or regulations.

(f) Benefit from work injury compensation insurance premium discount program.

(g) Reduce costs of healthcare claims, particularly short-term disability claims.

Additionally, research has found that drug use is negatively associated with job
performance and positively correlated with accidents, injuries, absences, involuntary
turnover, & job-withdrawal behaviour.

 In Singapore, the Work Injury Compensation Act does not cover employees who
suffer work-related injuries while under the influence of alcohol or drugs not
prescribed by a medical doctor/dentist.

It is thus in the interest of the employees not to be at the workplace if they are
under the influence of alcohol and drugs.

In addition, because the workplace is under the supervision of management, the

hiring organization may not be able to sue the culpable employees for damage if the
employees cause property damage or bodily injuries to people around them at the
workplace.

It is thus in the interest of the hiring organization to ensure that individuals with
drug/alcohol abuse problems are not present at the workplace.

Alcohol Testing Methods

Alcohol dependency/use can be easily detected at the workplace when:

 The employee is reek of alcohol smell; and

 When an alcohol breathalyser is used to analyse the breath of the employee.

The employer can legitimately refuse to let the employee work for the day if the
employee fails the breathalyser test.

https://www.unitech.com.sg/blog/implementing-breathalyzer-test-singapore-company/

13
If a job applicant is tested positive for alcohol consumption at the point of applicant
assessment, questions can be raised about whether the applicant has alcohol
dependency problems and whether additional precautions should be exercised if the
applicant is eventually hired.

Drug Testing Methods

Drug use/dependency can be less obvious and is more difficult to detect.

A more systematic approach to testing may be necessary to forestall the problem:

(a) Paper-and-Pencil Tests: Simplest and the least controversial test.

(b) Urine Tests: This is used quite often.

 Basic urine test is relatively inexpensive.

 Results are returned quickly (usually within 24 hours).

 Testing is usually convenient for the applicant.

(c) Hair Analysis: This can detect drug use over a longer period of time than urine
testing.

(d) Oral Fluid Tests: An oral swab is rubbed on the inside of the mouth and the saliva
on the swab is analysed for the presence of drugs.

Barring lab error, this test is always accurate.

Accuracy of Chemical Tests:

 Because the physical properties of individual drugs are invariant, chemical tests
should be completely accurate.

 False positives (i.e., a drug is detected when it does not exist) may occur in an initial
test, however these errors should be eliminated by follow-up confirmation tests.

 Errors in confirmation tests occur only when the lab conducting the testing does not
use appropriate, standardized procedures.

Legal Issues in Pre-Employment Drug Testing:

 In the US, employers testing job applicants for drugs in the pre-employment phase
are less legally exposed than organizations testing current employees.

Major questions about drug testing have centred on six legal arguments (most
applicable to current employees):

14
 1. Testing represents an invasion of privacy.

2. Testing constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure.

3. Testing is a violation of due process.

4. Drug users are protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act (i.e., drug
addiction is a type of disability which the individual has suffered).

5. Testing may violate the Civil Rights Act (e.g., if disparate impact arises).

6. Testing may violate the National Labour Relations Act (e.g., if an employer fires
an employee for refusing to take a drug test without first consulting their union
representative).

 In Singapore, employers are not prohibited from testing applicants and employees
for drug use/dependency.

Workplace Drug Testing Regulations Around the World - Clarity Screening

Further, note that under Section 31 of Singapore’s Misuse of Drugs Act, police
officers are given the power to demand a urinalysis of suspected drug offenders.

Section 8A of the Act “prohibits any citizen or permanent resident of Singapore to

use any prohibited drug outside of the country, and if found guilty to be punished as
if they committed that act within the country”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_Drugs_Act_(Singapore)

Hence, an employee may fire an employee for contravening the law if the employee
is found to have used prohibited drugs.

Similarly, the hiring organization may disqualify the job applicant immediately if the
applicant is found to have consumed prohibited drugs.

 Drug testing has caused negative reactions among applicants as well as employees
and hence, it is important for personnel decision makers to understand individuals’
reactions to drug-testing programs.

In general, employees and applicants react more favourably to drug testing when:

a. Advance warning of testing is given.

b. Companies use rehabilitation of employees rather than termination when drugs

are detected.

15
 c. Drug testing adheres to fair detection procedures and explanation of results is
given.

d. There is perceived need for the test among the applicants and employees.

 Drug users had much more negative reactions to all forms of testing than did
nonusers and most do not regard the negative reactions as a bad thing.

 One current drug-testing issue facing companies is pre-employment drug testing of

applicants where the use of marijuana is legalized.

o In the US, there are so far no apparent legal cases challenging an employer’s
refusal to hire someone who has tested positive for marijuana and the applicant
showed the employer a medical marijuana card.

As long as the use of marijuana may adversely affect or potentially harm others
at work, its use is not protected by the law.

o In Singapore, the use of medical marijuana (not products containing unprocessed

or raw cannabis) has been approved in some rare medical cases, which makes
the drug a prescribed drug to the patient concerned and hence, its use is
protected by the law and the applicant/employee cannot be denied the job for
its use alone because there is no legal violation in such cases.

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/strict-rules-on-use-of-medical-
cannabis-spore

Guidelines for Drug-Testing on Job Applicants & Existing Employees:

(a) A company is in the most legally defensible position when it limits testing to those
positions that have major safety implications or a history of poor performance in
specific areas that might be linked to drug usage.

(b) In the US, private employers have more latitude in conducting drug testing as they
choose unless an employer is subject to government regulations.

In Singapore, there are no prohibitions against employers testing

applicants/employees for drug use.

(c) Private employers in the US have more flexibility in their drug-testing programs with
job applicants than with existing employees.

In Singapore, employers have a lot of flexibility for testing both applicants and
employees.

(d) A combination of screening and confirmatory tests are necessary for valid drug
testing.

16
 (e) Companies should obtain written consent of the applicant before testing and provide
the individual with the test results afterward.

(f) Standardized procedures used in the testing program should be applied to all job
applicants covered.

(g) Drug testing programs should be designed and reviewed periodically to ensure
privacy is accorded to individuals being tested.

2. Genetic Testing:

 This refers to an analysis of human DNA, RNA, chromosomes, proteins, or

metabolites that detects genotypes, mutations, or chromosomal changes.

 Genetic testing produces genetic information on individuals, family members of

those tested, and individuals’ family members’ health histories.

 In some cases, insurers having access to genetic information actually denied specific
customers of coverage based on their pre-existing conditions.

In other cases, employers possessing knowledge of genetic information actually

denied jobs to certain applicants or fired existing employees.

 The rationale behind these decisions is that applicants or employees with the wrong
genetic profile might develop expensive diseases or become injured on the job, thus
increasing workers’ compensation costs.

Legal Concerns

 A key legal case (Norman-Bloodsaw v. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory) in the US

raised the consciousness of the government regarding genetic testing and
discrimination against certain racial minorities:

o Without the individual’s knowledge or consent, the lab tested for sickle-cell
genetic markings linked to sickle-cell anaemia.

The plaintiffs in the case won based on the lab’s invasion of applicants’ privacy.

o The decision led Congress to recognize that genetic discrimination could occur in
the workplace through genetic testing.

This could produce adverse effects against certain gender, racial, and ethnic
groups as well as applicants having certain diseases not related to the applicants’
ability to perform their jobs.

 The US Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA):

17
 o After 13 years of congressional debate, President George W. Bush signed this Act
into law.

Title II of this Act specifically addresses issues most relevant to employers.

o Title II prohibits an employer, employment agency, labour organization, & joint

labour-management committee from discriminating against employees and
individuals because of genetic information.

o Relatively few cases have been processed under the provisions of GINA.

However, formal genetic discrimination complaints have been filed with the US
EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) involving companies asking
for medical history rather than genetic testing.

GINA specifically prohibits gathering such medical history.

 In Singapore, genetic testing is not commonly used in employment settings.

The Singapore Ministry of Health has cautioned against using genetic information
even for consumer advisory services (e.g., what foods should you avoid given your
genetic profile?) because most genetic research has been conducted on European
subjects (81%), with the rest of the world population sharing the other 19%.

The research results obtained from genetic testing thus may be more applicable to
Europeans and less to the rest of the world population.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/moh-guide-provide-non-
clinical-genetic-testing-health-12035952

In terms of talent assessment and selection, the Singapore Tripartite Alliance for Fair
and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) has specifically stated that:

“…Employers must recruit and select employees on the basis of

merit (such as skills, experience, or ability to perform the job), and
regardless of age, race, gender, religion, marital status and family
responsibilities, or disability. This list is not exhaustive and
highlights more common examples of discrimination. TAFEP will
look into all cases of workplace discrimination, even if they arise
from attributes that are not cited as examples in the Guidelines.”

It is likely that should genetic information be used in the talent assessment and
selection process, a formal complaint will receive the full attention of TAFEP and the
practice would be curtailed.

18
 Similarly, TAFEP has also specifically stated that:

“Companies should not ask job applicants to declare personal

information such as their mental health condition unless there is a
job-related requirement.”

This is likely to be interpreted as stating that job applicants should not be asked
about their or their family’s medical history/genetic makeup unless it is a job-related
requirement.

3. Neuroscience Lie Detection:

 Neuroscientists have begun to examine relationships between neural circuits of the

brain and development of diseases as well as behaviours and personality
characteristics.

 Like genetic testing, neuroimaging does not mean perfect predictions can be made
despite the significant progress made.

 Some opinion leaders have advocated that a GINA-like legislation should be enacted
to prohibit requesting, acquiring, or disclosing individuals’ neural information as well
as discriminating individuals on the basis of neural information.

 In Singapore, TAFEP is likely to take a similar stance against discriminating individuals

based on their neural imaging information unless it is job-related.

4. Polygraph Testing:

A polygraph is a machine that measures the physiological responses of examinees as

they give verbal responses to direct questions from a polygraph operator.

o Although once a mainstay for hiring retail personnel in large “big-box” stores, the
use of polygraphs for selection is now illegal in the US except for organizations
engaged in police work or domestic security.

o In Singapore, polygraph is not used in applicant assessment but the police

sometimes use it to decide whether to believe what a criminal suspect has claimed
when no other clear evidence is available to suggest one way or another.

A polygraph test usually involves these steps:

1. The examiner conducts a pre-test discussion that covers all questions used in the
test to gain a full understanding about the wording and meaning of the questions
that can be answered with a simple yes or no.

19
 2. After this discussion, the polygraph is attached to the examinee, and the actual
interview is conducted.

3. A list of questions are usually repeated once or twice to obtain more reliable
data.

Three types of questions are usually used:

(i) Irrelevant, non-emotional question (“Are you six feet tall?”)

(ii) Emotional control question (“Did you ever lie …?”)

(iii) About behaviour of interest (e.g., issues of interest such as prior thefts)

4. To detect lying, the operator looks for evidence of autonomous disturbance

associated with answers to the last type of question.

Lack of test reliability is the major problem with polygraph testing:

 Irrelevant reactions besides guilt can trigger an emotional response.

 A variety of countermeasures can be used by examinees to avoid detection (e.g.,

frequent lying would confuse the tester).

 Frequent occurrences of false-positive results (examinees are found to be lying

when in fact they are not).

 False negatives are also not unheard of (examinees are judged as truthful when
in fact they are not).

20
Transcript Exhibit 8.1
Establishing the Validity of Integrity/Honesty Testing

Job Description Statement

Integrity/Honesty Test: Based on a Detailed Job
Analysis:
(Reliable Data Obtained) Content Validity
(Representative Sampling of Job Contents) Tasks
Overt Attitude/Behaviour-Based
Integrity/Honesty Tests: Duties

Applicant Risk Profile Responsibilities

The Reid Report (30th Edition) Criterion-Related Validity
The Stanton Survey (Version 11.0) Working Conditions
(Predictors Criteria)
(Measures Predict Performance Outcomes)
Personality Trait-Based Job Outcomes Specification
Integrity/Honesty Tests: Statement:

Personnel Reaction Blank Construct Validity Work Outcomes Expected of

Employment Inventory (Work-Related Constructs (Integrity/Honesty): Constructs the Jobholder (Behaviours &
Hogan Personality Inventory Are Distinctly Defined & Commonly Understood & Proven Results)
to Exist & Are Reflected by the Measures Based on
Other Tests: Empirical Evidence) Jobholder Specification
Statement:
Drug Use Test
Genetic Testing Jobholder Qualifications
Neuroscience Lie Detection Face Validity
Polygraph Testing (Measures Are Believed to Reflect the Constructs & the Jobholder Work-Related
Constructs Are Job-Relevant Based on Subjective Reasoning) Personal Characteristics

21