INTRODUCTION

This report presents personality and intelligence theories and proposes psychometric scales
for the purpose of the recruitment process at Enchanted Ruby Resorts.
A successful recruitment process includes searching, interviewing, and evaluating people
In this process to make the best choices some personality tests can be utilised (Remann,
Nordin, 2021). Hospitality is a specific industry orientated on services rather than goods
manufacturing, therefore highly focused on customer contact. Employees should be equipped
with specific skills and possess the right personality traits.
The next paragraphs will present personality theories that focus on traits that can be observed
and selected therefore are useful in underpinning psychometric tests in the recruitment
process. Intelligence theories and psychometric tests will be critically discussed, and two
psychometric tests will be proposed for the purpose of recruitment.

PERSONALITY AND PERSONALITY TRAITS

In the study of personality, psychologists try to identify the personality characteristics which
describe individuals and the ways in which people differ. Personality is a psychological
construct, but some studies suggest that is influenced by biological processes and needs.
Psychologists such as Allport, Lewis, Cattell, and Goldberg contributed to the understanding
of personality yet there is still debate about its definition. According to Allport
“personality is the dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical
systems that determine his characteristics behavior and thought” (Allport, 1961).
Allport’s definition represents an idiographic approach to personality assuming that each
person has a unique psychological structure and that some traits are possessed by only one
person in opposition to the nomothetic approach emphasizes similarities of individuals.
In the nomothetic approach, traits have the same meaning for everyone although people have
them in different sets and levels. This approach uses quantitative methods to assess such as
factor analyses.
A personality trait can be defined as “a relatively stable, consistent, and enduring internal
characteristic that is inferred from a pattern of behaviours, attitudes, feelings, and habits in
the individual”. Psychologists studying personality traits found that personality is a “unified
and organized totality” rather than a construct based on a single characteristic (McAdams,
1997). Traits theories represent different approaches. Some psychologists see traits as
biological factors influencing behavior, while others prefer social learning approach and
engage in a nature/nurture debate. The most recent approach accepts that personality is a
function of both biological traits and environment (McAdams, 1997). and research shows that
personality traits are more malleable by environmental factors than it was previously believed
(Briley et al., 2014).
The first challenge for trait theorists was identifying traits. Allport and Odbert chose 18, 000
English words used to describe people. Reduced later to 4,500 still was to many traits. Using
factor analysis statistic tools Cattell reduced this list to 16 factors which created a base for a
personality assessment called the 16PF. Later work of Hans and Sybil Eysenck focused
on temperament and theory of personality dimensions: extroversion/introversion,
neuroticism/stability, and later psychoticism.
Trait theories of personality are especially useful in assessing personality using quantitative
methods Eysenck’s Trait theory of personality focuses on few traits while Cattel’s theory is
more complex and to describe personality uses a bigger set of traits.

PERSONALITY THEORIES

Eysenck’s theory of personality is based on biology and specific qualities of the nervous
system. Eysenck research was focused on patients with neurotic disorders. His first study
about genetics and personality was carried out on identical and non-identical twins, ages 11
and 12 tested for neuroticism and findings suggested that “neurotic predisposition is to a large
extent hereditarily determined.". (Eysenck and Prell 1951). Eysenck was one of the most
cited academic author of his time but later became controversial because of his statement
about race and IQ differences also some of his work was questioned and withdrawn as failed
replication (Colman 2016). His Personality Theory and PEN personality model is biologically
based and one of the most known.
Eysenck discovered different personality traits which he groups into two dimensions:
Extraversion and Neuroticism and later added Psychoticism as a third dimention. Those
aspects of personality (extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism) are connected with the
biological state of the autonomic nervous system balance which depends on excitation and
inhibition processes. Personality is a product of this balance. Each dimension reflects a
person’s sensitivity to stimuli - arousal. A person with stronger reactions to stimuli will be
rated lower on the extraversion scale as will be uncomfortable with a high level of
stimulation.
Eysenck identified neuroticism as the highest level of emotional instability. Neurotic people
are prone to anxiety, hysteria, depression, or obsession and their reactions are usually
exaggerated. Neuroticism cause distress by creating more stressful events and increasing
reactivity to those events (Bolger, Schilling,1991). At the other end of this dimension is
stability with a high level of self-control, people are calm and emotionally stable.
The extraversion dimension is characterised by impulsiveness, lack of inhibitions, optimism,
sociality, and high vitality. On the other end of the scale, introverts are more passive, less
social, and more likely pessimists. The third dimension psychoticism reflects impulsiveness,
aggressiveness, and a lack of empathy. Psychotic people are often insensitive, antisocial,
violent, aggressive, and extravagant. Eysenck suggested that psychoticism was influenced by
biological factors which was the level of testosterone.
Eysenck two dimensions of Extravertism-Introversion and Neurotism-Stability can be
compared to one of the early personality types proposed by Galen:
Choleric type - highly neurotic and highly extrovert
Melancholic type – highly neurotic and low extrovert
Sanguine type – low neurotic and highly extrovert
Phlegmatic type – low neurotic and low extrovert.
Eysenck’s theory is taking into account both biological predispositions and influence of
conditioning and socialization during the developmental period. This approach is more valid
than a biological or environmental theory. The weakness of Eysenck’s theory lay in research
and measurement. Even Eysenck, (1991) pointed out that individual responses to stimuli may
warry in different people so it is not clear which stimuli were activated in a specific time.
Eysenck’s personality theory was a basis for Jeffrey Alan Gray, a former student of
Eysenck's, who developed an alternative theoretical interpretation of his theory called Gray's
biopsychological theory of personality. Extraversion and neuroticism proposed by Eysenck
are also similar to those proposed in the Big Five Trait Theory. Eysenck’s trait of
psychoticism can be related to two traits in the Big Five model: conscientiousness and
agreeableness (Goldberg & Rosalack 1994). There is no openness to experience in Eysenck's
dimensions, yet he claimed his model is a better way to describe personality (Eysenck, 1992)

The Big Five Model, also known as the Five-Factor Model, is the Trait theory built on the
work of many researchers such as Allport, Cattell, Fiske, Norman, Smith, Goldberg, McCrae
and Costa. Allport and Odbert created a list of 4,500 words describing person and Cattell
using a statistical method (factor analysis) reduced Allport’s list to sixteen traits. Later work
of Lewis Goldberg and continued by McCrae & Costa, contributed to developing model
which consist of 5 main traits: conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to
experience, and extraversion. Those traits can be remembered by acronyms CANOE or
OCEAN (Ackerman 2017).
 openness to experience described as a tendency to appreciate new ideas, value,
feelings, and behaviour, being curious and courageous,
 conscientiousness, understood as the tendency to be careful, on time and to follow
rules, being efficient and well organized rather than extravagant and careless,
 extraversion as a tendency to be talkative and sociable, outgoing and energetic
rather than reserved or isolated,
 agreeableness as being friendly and compassionate rather than critical and
rational,
 neuroticism as a tendency to be over-sensitive and experience emotions of
sadness, worry and anger, being nervous rather than resilient and confident ,
(Jamaludin, Mehon, 2020, Soto, 2018).
Traits in Big Five Model represents continuum rather than two opposite categories and every
person’s characteristic is within the spectrum of two extreme ends (eg. extroverts –
introverts). The traits of Big Five remain relatively stable throughout most of lifetime (Soto,
C. J., 2018). They are influenced significantly by genes and the environment, with an
estimated heritability of 50%. A study conducted on identical twins fraternal twins estimated
the heritability of conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience, and
extraversion to be between 44%-61% and 53%. Heritability for males and females does not
seem to differ significantly (Leohlin et al., 1998). Cross-cultural studies confirm the thesis of
the strong genetic origin of the Big Five personality traits (Yamagata et al., 2006). The Big
Five Model places people on the continuum of personality traits rather then sorting them into
specific types (Chen, 2018).
The importance of ethical behaviour to an organization is crucial. Barrick, Mount and Judge
(2001) suggested that personality influences employees’s ethical behaviour. Anwar (2018)
found a positive relationship between Openness to Experience, Cautiousness, Agreeableness,
and ethical behaviour of employees, and negative relationship between Extraversion and
Neuroticism and ethical behaviour. Judge ( 2002) found that high scores on Neuroticism trait
affect organizations negatively. Jamaludin and Mehon (2020), in their study used the five
factors of personality model as an instrument to study ethical behaviour. Results show that
for the hospitality industry employees Openness to Experience personality trait contributes
the most to ethical behaviour at their workplace, followed by Agreeableness and
Conscientiousness.
Although Big Five is the most popular trait theory and personality marker it is not personality
theory explaining biological/environmental origin of traits but rather statistically systemised
( with the use of factor analyse) system of characteristics gathered together in clusters –
factors. Factor analysis as the statistical method used to identify the main dimensions is often
criticised for “lacks a universally recognized basis for choosing among solutions with
different numbers of factors”(Eysenck, 1992). Expression of personality traits can differ in
different cultures as socio-cultural conditioning and learning differ across different cultures
(Piekkola, 2011). The presence of the Big Five has been tested mainly in literate
and urbanised populations and were not found in unliterate, indigenous population in Bolivia
(Gurven et al. (2013) thus more studies need to be conducted to confirm environmental
validity.

INTELIGENCE AND THEORIES OF INTELIGENCE

American Psychology Association dictionary defines intelligence as “the ability to derive

information, learn from experience, adapt to the environment, understand, and correctly
utilize thought and reason”. Intelligent individuals identify, process, and bind together bits of
social and ecological information more easily and quickly than other people (Goldstein et
al.,2014)
The foundations of theory and measurement of intelligence were created by the work of two
scientists Francis Galton and Alfred Binet at the beginning of the 19 th century. Galton is also
considered a father of intelligence tests. He measured mainly biological – sensory
information’s processing ( such as reaction time, colour recognition or eye judgement), taking
the high speed as a sign of higher intelligence. Although some of these measures can be
questioned because of lack of reliability and validity ( poor performance on visual tasks can
be related to eyesight problems not to lack of intelligence), other such as reaction time, are
still used today. (Maltby et al., 2017). Binet and Simon created the first intelligence test for
purpose of identifying children with special educational needs. The early intelligence test
consisted of 30 simple life skills related tasks and created scale of mental age, compared to
actual biological age and its expectations. The ~Binet-Simon test was used by William Stern,
who developed the measurement marker IQ (intelligence quotient) which today is a basic
intelligence measurement scale (Maltby et al., 2017).
The structure and origin of intelligence is a subject of debate and different approaches are
applied to the topic. Researchers like Spearman see intelligence as a general ability, others as
a set of specific skills and talents. Some like Galton see intelligence mainly as a genetic thus
inherited factor, others accept environment influence. As a result, they developed several
contrasting theories of intelligence. Despite great significance and contribution to knowledge
about human intelligence some of those theories carried wrong assumptions and its
application caused harm in form of racial and gender discrimination, eugenics and prejudice
which affected immigration and education (Goldstein et al.,2014).

Spearman Theory of Two-factor Intelligence

The two-factor theory of intelligence was created by Charles Spearman in 1904. When
analysing people’s performance on tasks related to intelligence Spearman noticed corelation
between high scores in different areas and predicted existence of one factor influencing
cognitive abilities – general intelligence and a second factor, s, which relates to person’s
ability in specific area. According to Spearman people have certain level of general
intelligence g and specific intelligence s which vary from person to person and is based on
the specific task. (Kalat, 2014). Although Spearman believed that different types of skills
required their own type of intelligence, which he called s for specific factors, he still viewed g
as the most important factor which can be well measured. G is a statistical construct, and
while originally it was only a result of factor analysis, with time it gained meaning of mental
abilities and capacity. Spearman believed that general intelligence was inherited.
The strength of Spearman’s theory is that it is still present and recreated. For example, a
study could use and be compared with various other similar intelligence measures. Scales
such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children has been compared with Spearman's g.
Nature versus Nurture is one topic that has been researched with Spearman's g factor.
Research found that environmental factors influence the g factor rather in early life , rather
than adulthood also inheritance of g has been well researched and documented ( Bouchard,
2009). Most of the criticism of Spearman’s theory is that g is not sufficient to measure
intelligence and that it is rather statistical construct and cannot be accounted for correlation
between different attributes of intelligence. Spearman’s Two Factor Theory of Intelligence
was a starting point for Cattell-Horn theory of fluid and crystallised intelligence.
Cattell-Horn Theory of Fluid and Crystalised Intelligence and CHC

Cattell-Horn theory proposes that general intelligence consists of two intellectual

abilities: crystallized intelligence (g-c) which consists of previously acquired knowledge and
can be measured by tests of vocabulary, general information, and fluid intelligence (g-f),
which consist of mental processes used to approach new tasks by using reasoning. Later
versions of the theory, includes visual intelligence (g-v), which consist of mental processes
engaged in visual-spatial tasks (APA, 2023). According to Cattel, Fluid intelligence (Gf) is a
function of biological and neurological factor while Crystallized intelligence (Gc) is an
ability based on knowledge and as such depends on cultural factor and education ( Beaujean,
2017). Horn elaborated on Cattel’s theory, and from analysing data he concluded existence of
more than two general abilities. He identified at first four additional and later another 5
abilities that includes:
visualization (Gv),
short-term memory (Gsm),
long-term retrieval (Glr), and
processing speed (Gs),
all treated as equals to Gf and Gc (Kaufman, 2013).
Another theory associated with Spearman ‘s G intelligence was Carroll’s hierarchical theory
of Strata. Based on factor analysis identified three levels or Strata of abilities. Stratum III
General is related to Spearman’s General Intelligence, Stratum II Broad consist of 8 broad
factors similar to Horn’s Broad Abilities; and Stratum I Narrow consists from about 70
highly specific abilities . Cattel’s-Horn Gf-Gc theory and Carroll’s Hierarchical Theory of
Strata complement each other and were merged together into CHC (Cattell-Horn Carroll)
Theory of Intelligence.
The strength of the CHC theory lays in fact that it includes general intelligence and different
aspects of intelligence. It highly influenced IQ tests which moved from focusing on general
intelligence to 4-7 cognitive abilities (Kaufman 2013). Although CHC model is widely used
as a framework during test design it cannot be seen as a completed theory as possibility of
modifications and need for revision have been already suggested (McGrew, 2005).
CHC theory and Spearman’s g factor form the theoretical foundation for nearly all
commercial tests of intelligence. Theories as Gardener’s Multiple inteligence try to
complement traditional theories with additional abilities. The theory of Emotional
Intelligence introduce new type of intelligence (Kaufman, 2013).

Theory of Emotional Inteligence

Theory of Emotional intelligence was first proposed in 1990 by Peter Salovey and John D.
Mayer (Salovey and Mayer, 1990). They defined Emotional intelligence as "the ability to
monitor one's own and other people's emotions, to discriminate between different emotions
and label them appropriately, and to use emotional information to guide thinking and
behavior". Salovey and Mayer created ability-based model with four abilities:
Perceiving emotions – detecting and interpreting emotions from faces, pictures, voices and
recognising own emotions.
Using emotions – engaging and using emotions in cognitive processes of thinking and
problem-solving.
Understanding emotions – understanding emotion language and complexity of emotions.
Managing emotions – regulating emotions (own and others) and using it to achieve goals .
Goleman’s (1995), proposed different – mixed model of emotional intelligence, originally
consisted of five abilities but later reduced to 4 main areas:
Self-awareness - ability to identify own emotions.
Self-regulation/management – the ability to manage own emotions.
Social awareness –the ability to recognise and influence others’ emotions.
Social skills/management –the ability to create and maintain good interpersonal relationships.
Another model was proposed by psychologist Reuven Bar-On. It is constructed on traits and
abilities from the field of emotional and social knowledge. Bar-On developed the oldest
instrument for measuring emotional intelligence The original was in the form of self-report
assessment evolved later to a 360-degree assessment. Bar-On assessment has limitation in
work- life situations (Goldstein, 2014).
The emotional intelligence theories are criticised for differences between the models. Despite
those differences models fits in personality trait systems framework created by Salovey and
Mayer (Maltby, 2017). The major criticism comes from Eysenck for assuming that EI is a
type of intelligence or cognitive ability (Eysenck, 2000). There is scientific debate whether
EI is a measurable phenomenon (Matthews et al., 2004). Clarity on this depends on the
acceptance of the distinction between trait EI (or trait emotional self-efficacy) and ability EI
(or cognitive-emotional ability). This distinction is based on the type of measurement used to
measure the construct: trait EI is measured via self-report questionnaires, whereas ability EI
is assessed via maximum performance. Despite fact that Self-reported performance-based
measures do not meet construct validity criteria, EI can be measured as it consist of skills and
abilities which can be measured. (Matthews et al., 2004)
The relationship between EI and job performance was examined with mixed results, some
research like Rozell et al. (2006) found positive relationship but some did not find that kind
of positive relationship. Petrides, Cote and Miners investigated relationship between
emotional intelligence and general intelligence and found that achievement in the workplace
and education for the individuals with lower general intelligence was higher if their
emotional intelligence level was higher (Maltby, 2017). Despite mixed results of high and
low correlations, EI assessment can be still considered better predictor of potential and
abilities then other recruitment methods like interview or motivation letter.

PSYCHOMETRIC TESTS

Psychometric approach to intelligence can be defined as objective measurement of mental

abilities.sy Psychometry refers to mental (psycho) measurement (metry). Psychometric tests
assess psychological characteristics like aptitudes, behaviours, personality and emotions. First
designed to measure intelligence in medical science, later focused also on testing personality.
Broad application to business settings was possible with developing computer technology
which made it effective tool to select people suitable for specific role, but it also can be used
to develop, and retain current employees by helping management understand and build
relationships with team members, increasing motivation and job satisfaction.
Most psychometric tests can be grouped into two. The first group of psychometric tests is
measuring your cognitive or aptitude abilities. Consist of a list of questions to answer in a
strictly limited time. This group includes tests such as numerical, verbal or abstract tests .
The second group of psychometric test measure personality. Different types of personality
psychometric tests. measures different set of personality traits using a different style of
questions. It is normally not restricted by time and has no wrong or right answers. It measures
personality traits which carry information for employer about risks and potentials of hiring
specific candidate and how he/she will fit into organisation. Personality and behavioural style
are measured through what is known as a self-report personality questionnaire (Berger and
Ghei, 1995). ins
Psychometric tests are especially useful in requirements process as can help to identify
candidates with personality and cognitive abilities matching those required for particular role.
Can also expose hidden characteristics which are not obvious and easily detectable in
traditional job interview process. Tests can be used to verify candidate’s skill or knowledge,
as in job-knowledge tests; or physical capabilities. Tests can predict learning skills or assess
motivation will be to work and cooperate with team. Tests such as honesty or integrity tests
can screen out misfits for organisation (Berger, Ghey 1995)
One of the critique argued that those tests are sometimes poorly constructed or misused in
employment procedures. IT can screen out potentially good employees or discriminate
against some people ( cultural, gender, racial or etnicity bias). The way it is used and
interpretation is subject of its validity. Some of the psychometric tests are useful as they have
validity and reliability eg. Big Five Inventory (BFI) or Eysenck's Personality Questionnaire
(EPQ-R), other as Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), has been criticised for lack of
validity (Hogan, 2007).
The factor to consider is that tests are not free, but employers need to look at this cost as
investment with benefits. If psychometric procedure is not used, inappropriate outcome in
form of failure in recruitment process. It can be damaging to the business directly –
employee’s interactions with customers affects company image but also those who have to
work alongside behaving inappropriate or not in professional way employee (Edenborough,
2005).
Another issue is increasing number of pre-briefing material for psychometric tests which
helps to pass the test but affecting it reliability. Employers need to be aware of fact that lack
of stable and control conditions during testing can also affect it reliability. Noisy or
physically stressful environment affects performance (Edenborough, 2005).

SPECIFIC PSYCHOMETRIC TESTS RECOMMENDED FOR ERR

The Big-Five Model of personality is the most popular model of personality It consist of set
of five personality traits: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and
Conscientiousness. The Big Five is typically measured with self-report or peer-report
questionnaires. McCrae and Costa’s developed the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI),
the first alternative set of Big-Five markers. Initially, the NEO Personality Inventory
measured six parts of three global domains (Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness) of
personality. the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R) consists of 30 specific
traits, including agreeableness and conscientiousness. Its validation is attested by the results
published in over 2,000 studies distributed in articles, chapters, and books (Costa & McCrae,
2008). NEO -PI is applicable in cross-cultural environment and NEO inventories are
available in over 40 languages It became the most universally used personality test in the
Five-Factor Model research(Costa & McCrae, 2008).
Human resource of Enchanted Ruby Resorts should focus on choosing with high Openness to
Experience, Extraversion, Agreeable, and Conscientiousness. ERR would benefit from firing
employees who are open to change, responsive to the needs and goals of others, have high
degree of moral obligation, as well as value truth and honesty that can change unethical
habits. This will ensure success of ERR as a whole and culture of ethical behaviour. Proper
evaluations leading to identifying personality types of employees will help to select right
employees. This is supported by study, which suggests that there is a need to strategically
focus on employees with Openness to Experience personality traits when trying to attract the
most ethical employees (Jamudin).

EI TESTS
Emotional inteligence is measured in three different ways:
 Self-report
 Other-report
 Ability measure
Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) provide the most objective
assessment of EI, for purpose of recruitment. MSCEIT can be related to and verbal
intelligence Big Five personality dimensions of Openness and Agreeableness (Kaufman,
2013) and can predict social competence, work relationships or aggressiveness (Mayer et
al., 2003).
The MSCEIT is a 141 scale that measures the four branches of EI, each branch reflecting
specific skills – perceiving emotions, using emotions to facilitate thought, understanding
emotions and managing emotions. The test consists of emotion-based problem-solving
questions. It testes a abilities from four branches of emotional intelligence. Results can be
compared either with sample of respondents or experts (Mayer et al.,2003). Goleman’s model
is measured by the Emotional Competence Inventory which is designed for use in the
workplace (Goleman and Boyatzis, 2005). It is a 360-degree test where other people evaluate
person’s emotional intelligence according to the abilities listed in Goleman’s model. Example
items in the Emotional Competence Inventory determining whether the person treat others
with respect and courtesy, behave in appropriate way towards people from different
backgrounds, recognise people’s emotions, moods.
Ability tests (MSCEIT) and 360 peer review tests measuring EQ (ECI) are recommended for
hiring process for Enchanted Ruby Resort as it provides more accurate information then self-
report tests which may lack of honest responses.

CONCLUSION

Psychology focuses on personality to understand individuals’ behaviours. It helps

with assessing potential and predict actions and behaviours as well as preventing undesired
behaviours. In recruitment process it psychometric tests are useful in selecting people with
desired personality traits and eliminating those with undesired traits determining unwanted
counterproductive or destructive behaviours. While skills can be learned and trained to have
the right set of personality traits assure the right attuite and motivation level and eliminate
undesired traits such as aggressiveness or egocentrism. Employees’ performance ensures the
organization’s success as a whole. Customers’ experience and well-being, depend on
hospitality’s quality, and this again on how employees are motivated and prepared to properly
fulfil their duties. Employing people with great personalities may seem like a key to success
but employers and human resources must be aware of the limitations of this approach.
Intelligence and cognitive skills are important factors for a successful training process and
job performance but emotional intelligence influence interactions with other people. It is
important for hospitality employee to understand how other people feel so they can provide
high quality services orientated on guests positive experiences and satisfaction.
REFERENCES

Ackerman, C.,2017. Big Five Personality Traits: The OCEAN Model Explained. [online
Available from https://positivepsychology.com/big-five-personality-theory. (Accessed 10
July 2023).
Allport, G. W., 1961. Pattern and Growth in Personality. Fort Worth TX: Harcourt College
Publisher.
APA Dictionary of Psychology, 2023. [Online], Available on https://dictionary.apa.org/cattell-
horn-theory-of-intelligence. (Accessed 9 July 2023)
Ashton, M. C., 2017. Individual Differences and Personality (3rd ed.). ISBN 978-0-12-
809845-5. OCLC 987583452
Bandalos, Deborah L. (2018). Measurement theory and applications for the social sciences.
New York. p. 261. ISBN 978-1-4625-3215-5. OCLC 1015955756.
Beaujean, Alexander. (2017). Catell-Horn-Caroll theory of intelligence.
Berger, F. and Ghei, A. 1995. Human resources “Employment Tests. A Facet of Hospitality
Hiring. [Online]. Available from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0010880496810007. (Accessed 13 July
2023).
Bolger, E. A., & Schilling, E. A., 1991. Personality and the problems of everyday life: The
role of neuroticism in exposure and reactivity to daily stressors. Journal of Personality, 59,
p.335-386.
Bouchard, J. J., 2009. “Genetic influence on human intelligence (Spearman's g): How
much?". Annals of Human Biology. 36 (5): 527–544

Briley, D. A., Tucker-Drob, E. M., 2014. “ Genetic and environmental continuity in

personality development: A meta-analysis” Psychological Bulletin. 140 (5): 1303–1331.
Edenborough, R., 2005. Assessment methods in recruitment, selection & performance: a
manager's guide to psychometric testing, interviews and assessment centres. Kogan Page
Publishers.
Chen, P. G., Palmer, C. L., 2018. The Prejudiced Personality? Using the Big Five to Predict
Susceptibility to Stereotyping Behavior. American Politics Research, 46(2), 276–307.
Colman, A.M., 2016 “Race differences in IQ: Hans Eysenck's contribution to the debate in
the light of subsequent researc. Personality and Individual Differences. 103: 182-189.
Eysenck H.J, 1992. “Four ways five factors are not basic”. Personality and Individual
Differences. 13 (8) (PDF). Available from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/019188699290237J. (Accessed on 14 July
2023.
Goldberg, L. R., & Rosolack, T. K., 1994. The Big Five factor structure as an integrative
framework: An empirical comparison with Eysenck's P-E-N model. In C. F. Halverson, Jr.,
G. A. Kohnstamm, & R. P. Martin (Eds.), The developing structure of temperament and
personality from infancy to adulthood (pp. 7–35). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Goldstein, S, ; Naglieri, J. A. & Princiotta, D., 2014. Handbook of Intelligence: Evolutionary
Theory, Historical Perspective, and Current Concepts. New York, NY: Imprint: Springer.
Gurven, M., von Rueden, C., Massenkoff, M., Kaplan, H., & Lero Vie, M. (2013). How
universal is the Big Five? Testing the five-factor model of personality variation among
forager-farmers in the Bolivian Amazon. Journal of personality and social psychology,
104 (2), 354–370.
Hogan, R., 2007. Personality and the fate of organizations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates. p. 28. ISBN 978-0-8058-4142-8. OCLC 65400436.
Jamaludin, N.L., Mehon, P., 2020. The Role of Big 5 Personality Traits in Determining
Ethical Behaviour for Hospitality Industry Employees’ in Malaysia. International Journal of
Service Management and Sustainability. 5. 83. 10.24191/ijsms.v5i1.9861.

Jang, K. L., Livesley, W. J., & Vemon, P. A.,1996. Heritability of the Big Five Personality
Dimensions and Their Facets: A Twin Study. Journal of Personality, 64 (3), 577–592.
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S.,1999. The Big-Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and
theoretical perspectives. Handbook of personality: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 102–
138). New York: Guilford Press.
Kalat, J.W., 2014. Introduction to Psychology. 10th Edition. Cengage Learning, p. 295
Kaufman, J.C., Kaufman S.B., and. Plucker, J.A, 2013. “Contemporary Theories of
Intelligence”, in Daniel Reisberg (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Psychology,
edn, Oxford Academic, 2013. [Online], Available from
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195376746.013.0051. (Accessed 14 July 2023).
Loehlin, J. C., McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T., & John, O. P., 1998. Heritabilities of Common
and Measure-Specific Components of the Big Five Personality Factors. Journal of Research
in Personality, 32 (4), 431–453.
Maltby, J., Day, L. & Macaskill, A., 2017. Personality, Individual Differences and
Intelligence (4th ed.). Pearson.
Mayer, J.D., Salovey P., Caruso, D.R., Sitarenios, G. , 2003. "Measuring emotional
intelligence with the MSCEIT V2.0". Emotion. 3 (1): 97–105
McAdams, D. P., 1997. A conceptual history of personality psychology. In R. Hogan, J. A.
Johnson, & S. R. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology , p. 3–39. Academic
Press.
McGrew, K. S., 2005. The Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory of cognitive abilities. In D. P.
Flanagan & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary Intellectual Assessment: Theories, Tests,
and Issues,. p. 136–181. The Guilford Press.
Neal, A., Yeo, G., Koy, A., & Xiao, T., 2012. Predicting the form and direction of work role
performance from the Big 5 model of personality traits. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
33 (2), p.175–192.

Piekkola, B., 2011. “Traits across cultures: A neo-Allportian perspective”. Journal of

Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology. 31:2-24.
Reman, Patrik & Nordin, Angelika. (2021). Personality tests in recruitment.
Rozell, E., Pettijohn, Ch., Parker, R., 2006. Emotional Intelligence and Dispositional
Affectivity as Predictors of Performance in Salespeople. The Journal of Marketing Theory
and Practice. 14. 113-124.
Seeler, S. (2019), "Emotional Intelligence in Tourism and Hospitality", Journal of Tourism
Futures, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 289-290. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-09-2019-085
Soto, C. J., 2018. Big Five personality traits. In M. H. Bornstein, M. E. Arterberry, K. L.
Fingerman, & J. E. Lansford (Eds.), The SAGE encyclopedia of lifespan human development
p. 240-241. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Yamagata, S., Suzuki, A., Ando, J., Ono, Y., Kijima, N., Yoshimura, K., . . . Jang, K.
(2006). Is the Genetic Structure of Human Personality Universal? A Cross-Cultural Twin
Study From North America, Europe, and Asia. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 90 (6), 987-998.