Validity Evidence for Off-the-Shelf Language-Based Personality Assessment Using Video Interviews: Convergent and Discriminant Relationships with Self and Observer Ratings

Technological advances have led to the development of automated methods for personnel assessment that are purported to augment or outperform human judgment. However, empirical research providing validity evidence for such techniques in the selection context remains scarce. In addressing this void, this study focuses on language-based personality assessments using an off-the-shelf, commercially available product (i.e., IBM Watson Personality Insights) in the context of video-based interviews. The scores derived from the language-based assessment were compared to self and observer ratings of personality to examine convergent and discriminant relationships. The language-based assessment scores showed low convergence with self-ratings for openness, and with self- and observer ratings for agreeableness. No validity evidence was found for extraversion and conscientiousness. For neuroticism, the patterns of correlations were in the opposite of what was theoretically expected, which raised a significant concern. We suggest more validation work is needed to further improve emerging assessment techniques and to understand when and how such approaches can appropriately be applied in personnel assessment and selection.