Interview Information




Theimportance of research cannot be gainsaid as far as enhancing theknowledge that individuals have regarding the interplay of variedaspects in the society is concerned. Needless to say, numerousstudies, both documented and undocumented have been carried out. Alarge number of these have been done in an effort to comprehend thecharacteristics of people or rather their reactions when inparticular situations. This paper examines studies in which threetests have been carried out, with particular emphasis on the reasonsfor the interest in the tests.

Personalpreferences test

Ferrara,R. J. (1996). The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule as a Predictorof Success in a Collegiate Professional Pilot Training Program. TheJournal of Aviation/Aerospace Education &amp Research.Volume 6. Number 2

Thisstudy was carried out in an effort to determine the value of EPPSwhen used as a predictive instrument in collegiate pilot trainingprograms. However, it is noted that the research may not havesafeguarded validity of the study especially considering that thescores regarding specific EPPS factors were utilized from a samplepopulation that had not been determined in a random manner.

Thenormative data was tested on 185 professional pilot candidates fromMiddle Tennessee State University, of which only 163 test resultsonly were seen as sufficiently usable. The statistics regardingindividuals who completed the study would then be completed with thatof individuals who did not successfully complete it using astatistical analysis.

Administratorswere required to have a baccalaureate degree. My interest in thepersonal preference test was specifically triggered by the fact thatit encompasses a forced choice objective, non-projective personalityinventory that measures individual rating in a total of fifteenmotives and normal needs (Hogan, 2005).


Parkinson,J. &amp Taggar, S (2005). Case Study Performance, Intelligence andPersonality. InternationalJournal of Case Method Research &amp ApplicationXVII, 3

Thisinstrument was used to test personal traits and intelligence aspredictors of performance. The validity of the instruments wasensured by testing it on diverse populations, as well as ensuringthat the participants were randomly selected. Research has shown thatthe NEO personality inventory questionnaire is reliable and valid ininstances where it is administered to college or university students.

Theparticipants in this case were 305 third-year undergraduate businessstudents who were undertaking introduction to human resourcemanagement course in a Canadian university. Of particular note is thefact that the response rate for the students remained at 76 percent.The administrator in the study was the course instructor who has aMasters’ degree as that is the only way he could have known themost appropriate way for applying the instrument.

Myinterest in the instrument was piqued by the increased importance ofpersonality testing in decision-making especially in the recruitmentof applicants in the job industry (Hogan, 2005). For instance, theuse of HPI or Hogan Personality Inventory profile of High performerswould allow for the determination of the suitability of an individualin a particular position or company (Hogan, 2005).

Duckworth,A.L., Quinn, P.D., Lynam, D. R., loeber, R &amp Stouthamer-Loeber, M(2010). Role of test motivation in intelligence testing. PNAS EarlyEdition

Thetest was carried out to determine whether individual variations inmotivations in the course of IQ testing may spuriously inflate thepredictive validity of outcomes of intelligence testing. On the samenote, it examined whether there is a reduction in motivation onintelligence tests that are administered in low-stake research cases.

Thereliability of the test was safeguarded by controlling for varieddemographic variables. In addition, the researchers used a series ofstructural equation models so as to test whether nonintellectivecharacteristics that contribute to test motivations confound therelationships between intelligence quotient and crucial outcomes(Duckworth et al, 2010).

Thetest was carried out on 508 boys in Pittsburg Youth Study.

Myinterest in this instrument was triggered by the need to determine orcome up with a measure for accurately predicting degeneracy inindividuals so as to provide treatment early on to kids and avert thepossibility of criminal behavior in the society (Borghans et al,2008). It goes without saying that such studies would haveimplications on the functionality of the society at large. Indeed,this test would determine the relationship between an individual’sintelligence and culpability or predisposition to antisocialbehavior, which would enable for the determination of where tochannel resources.


BorghansL, Meijers H, Ter Weel B (2008) The role of noncognitive skills inexplaining cognitive test scores. EconInq46:2–12.

Duckworth,A.L., Quinn,P.D., Lynam, D. R., loeber, R&amp Stouthamer-Loeber, M (2010). Role of test motivation inintelligence testing. PNAS Early Edition

Ferrara,R. J. (1996). The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule as a Predictorof Success in a Collegiate Professional Pilot Training Program. TheJournal of Aviation/Aerospace Education &amp Research.Volume 6. Number 2

HoganR (2005) In defense of personality measurement: New wine for oldwhiners. HumPerform18:331–341.

Parkinson,J. &amp Taggar, S (2005).Case Study Performance,Intelligence and Personality. InternationalJournal of Case Method Research &amp ApplicationXVII, 3