From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Thu Sep 09 2004 - 18:07:12 BST
Hi
I always find my answer is not one of the choices!
DM
----- Original Message -----
From: "MarshaV" <marshalz@i-2000.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: MD and the LIE DETECTOR test
>
> Hi,
>
> Personality types? Interesting questions! I've taken three different
> versions of the Myers-Briggs tests, and the same personality came up all
> three times. Were these static patterns of personality?
>
> MarshaV
>
>
> At 01:00 PM 9/8/2004 -0600, you wrote:
> >David,
> >
> >That is a good question. Not sure how
> >to think of those, morally... hmmm.
> >
> >Morally, it seems that it comes down to the
> >intent of the test on the one hand and the
> >application-evaluation on the other.
> >
> >Is the definition of a personality type a
> >social definition or an intellectual one?
> >
> >Is the operational level of the individual
> >social or intellectual?
> >
> >Is the requiring entity a social entity with
> >a purpose of dominating a biological
> >individual, or a social individual, or an
> >intellectual?
> >
> >Does the test TRULY measure what is
> >needed or is i simply being pulled off
> >the shelf as a "close" match?
> >
> >Does the test truly reflect the possible
> >universe of test takers?
> >
> >In evaluation, how are the "corner-cases"
> >and "outliers" handled?
> >
> >
> >================
> >For existing tests...
> >
> >In operation however, those few times
> >I've been involved in those exrcises, even
> >when it was the same test, I ended up in
> >very different quadrants. It seemed that
> >the test answers were more a measure
> >of my mood on THAT day, than anything
> >at base about my personality.
> >
> >The assumptions of the test creator
> >and the variability in personal use of
> >language and education, when they
> >are sufficiently different make a train
> >wreck out of the whole thing. (The
> >company or test creator will strongly
> >deny such and discuss their validation
> >testing, but it is always a "short cut"
> >rather than rigorous...they have an
> >axe to grind at the testing companie$.)
> >
> >So, before I even get to Moral, the tests
> >generally tend to suck.
> >
> >Case in point, the best salesman I've
> >known failed all the tests as a sales
> >candidate given by his department.
> >(He had already been working there
> >before they started testing.)
> >
> >The tests said he was an introverted
> >intellectual, an "engineer type", and
> >not a "people person". What the test
> >could not measure was that he had a
> >passion for the product and that the
> >buyers were largely engineer types,
> >who resisted glad handing salesmen.
> >
> >Of course it may be that the tests I've
> >seen were simply Schlock-jobs and
> >that is why it looks so bad...
> >
> >A well designed test might show your
> >tendency, but will ever measure the
> >reality of perfomance choices in the real
> >workplace. The only sure measure of a
> >job is doing the job.
> >
> >thanks--mel
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "David Morey" <us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk>
> >To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> >Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 11:18 AM
> >Subject: Re: MD and the LIE DETECTOR test
> >
> >
> > > What about so-called personality tests?
> > >
> > > DM
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Scott Roberts" <jse885@earthlink.net>
> > > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 7:05 PM
> > > Subject: RE: MD and the LIE DETECTOR test
> > >
> > >
> > > > Mel,
> > > >
> > > > Since I am a nervous sort of person, I've never been able to imagine
> > > > passing one, even without lying, so I too have always been bothered.
It
> > > > could be that they can take this into account, but I'm not inclined
to
> > > > trust them.
> > > >
> > > > My view is that if employers requires a lie detector test, or a
> >urinalysis
> > > > for that matter, then it is immoral to sign up with them, as well as
it
> > > > being immoral for them to require the test. Pretty much for reason
(2),
> > > the
> > > > Giant dominating the individual.
> > > >
> > > > - Scott
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > [Original Message]
> > > > > From: ml <mbtlehn@ix.netcom.com>
> > > > > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> > > > > Date: 9/7/2004 12:12:42 PM
> > > > > Subject: MD and the LIE DETECTOR test
> > > > >
> > > > > All:
> > > > >
> > > > > What is the morality of a lie detector test as
> > > > > a pre-employment test?
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems to me, for questions concerning your
> > > > > opinions and personal views, to be:
> > > > > 1) a physical level device placed in 'judgement'
> > > > > over a biological being.
> > > > > 2) a social level attempt at dominating the
> > > > > intellectual function of a person.
> > > > >
> > > > > The very existence of the "test" bothered me
> > > > > when I first heard of it at age five. Seemed that it
> > > > > was somehow wrong, not unlike the feeling I
> > > > > had at learning about the guilliotine or the rack.
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks--mel
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> > > > > Mail Archives:
> > > > > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> > > > > Nov '02 Onward -
> > > > http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> > > > > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> > > > > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> > > > Mail Archives:
> > > > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> > > > Nov '02 Onward -
> > > http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> > > > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> > > > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> > > Mail Archives:
> > > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> > > Nov '02 Onward -
> >http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> > > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> > > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> >Mail Archives:
> >Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> >Nov '02 Onward -
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> >MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
> >
> >To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> >http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Sep 09 2004 - 19:24:19 BST