Personality and Job Performance: The Evidence
Last reviewed
Summary
Research links some personality traits to job performance, with conscientiousness the most consistent across occupations, and shows that applicants tend to present themselves favorably on self-report questionnaires. Automated personality assessment is a newer field with mixed evidence, so its results should be treated as indicators.
What the evidence says
- A widely cited meta-analysis of the Big Five personality dimensions found that conscientiousness was the most consistent predictor of job performance across occupational groups, while other traits predicted performance in some occupations or criteria but not others. [1]
- A meta-analysis comparing job applicants with non-applicants found that applicants scored higher on desirable personality traits, consistent with response distortion on self-report measures in high-stakes settings. [2]
- Research on automated, video-interview-based personality assessment has reported mixed results: evidence of reliability and validity for some traits and settings, with weaker generalization in others. [3]
AuraSync's interpretation
Personality is a meaningful but modest part of the hiring picture, and self-reported answers are vulnerable in a hiring context. We take from this that personality evidence is more useful when it comes from how candidates respond in structured, role-relevant situations, and that any automated estimate must stay explainable and open to challenge.
What AuraSync claims
- AuraSync evaluates personality, cultural and emotional signals from observable behavior across several modalities, rather than relying only on self-reported answers.
- Results are calibrated to the role and interpreted relative to the organization's culture.
- Results are indicators, not a medical, psychological or clinical assessment.
Limitations
Trait-performance relationships found in meta-analyses are averages across many jobs and are modest in size. Evidence on automated personality inference is still developing, and results can be affected by audio and video quality, accent, device, disability or assistive technology.
Sources
- [1]Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x
- [2]Birkeland, S. A., Manson, T. M., Kisamore, J. L., Brannick, M. T., & Smith, M. A. (2006). A meta-analytic investigation of job applicant faking on personality measures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14(4), 317–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00354.x
- [3]Hickman, L., Bosch, N., Ng, V., Saef, R., Tay, L., & Woo, S. E. (2022). Automated video interview personality assessments: Reliability, validity, and generalizability investigations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(8), 1323–1351. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000695
This page summarizes third-party research for orientation. It is not an evaluation of AuraSync, and any summary of law is not legal advice.