Justifying counterproductive work behaviors and an integrity-based conditional reasoning test: Back to the drawing board?

Saul Fine, Yael Gottlieb-Litvin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Conditional reasoning tests (CRT) were proposed as an innovative approach to implicitly measure the rationalizations toward counterproductive work behaviors (CWB) often associated with overt integrity tests. The authors first set out to map a typology of justification mechanisms for general CWB, and to then validate a new integrity-based CRT in both honest and faking testing conditions. Unfortunately, while demonstrating encouraging construct and criterion validity in the honest testing condition, the test was less resistant to faking than originally anticipated, and ceased to be valid in the faking condition. Overall, the results provide theoretical insight toward understanding how employees justify CWB, but raise concerns regarding the potential operational limitations of at least some CRTs.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)328-333
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Selection and Assessment
Volume21
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2013

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Business, Management and Accounting
  • Applied Psychology
  • General Psychology
  • Strategy and Management
  • Management of Technology and Innovation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Justifying counterproductive work behaviors and an integrity-based conditional reasoning test: Back to the drawing board?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this