Employment testing vs. ASD

Post Reply New Topic

I've been reading this blogger and lawyer:

http://employmentassessment.blogspot.co ... order.html

He's been talking about how these tests discriminate against people with mental illness. And I'm looking at this:

And I am reminded of when I've taken these tests--and I don't think I've ever been hired by an employer that administers them--and that sense of fogginess and confusion returns, as I struggle to figure out: How on God's green earth do I answer these questions? A lot of these questions seem so vague and general that I can't answer them worth heck. And yet, at the job I'm at right now, I've been there 4 years and seem to get along OK, at least. I find these tests, though, to really sap my motivation.

So yes, I would be happy if they did away with these tests once and for all and replaced them with better tests, like job simulations and the like that actually would measure how you'd do on the job, rather than looking at answers to vague questions.

Other than my first job (where I BARELY) passed, I have never gotten a second look after doing one of these silly tests. Even when I got that first job the manager looked at my results and chuckled, no doubt because I was honest in my answers. Of course, most companies that I know that use these tests tend to have rather high turnover, and they can't seem to make that connection.

These tests are looking for superextroverted NTs. The answers they want are ridiculous although they vary by company. I was once told by a HR girl that the answer for the question to liking to gossip at work is to strongly agree since that means you're sociable. Ridiculous. The only way to pass them is to lie.

^^Yup, exactly so. The logic they use for tests like that is ridiculous - it technically doesn't qualify as logic.

It's the same sort of Pop Psychology Seminar quackery that gives us phrases like "Emotional Intelligence" - no such thing. Emotions obliterate intelligence, any intelligent person knows this.

But they genuinely convince themselves that socialization is the key to being an effective employee. Managers find that stupidity easy to swallow, because most of them have a SALES background, and socialization IS an important skill set for a SALESMAN. In an office setting, however, socialization is a tremendous TIME WASTER.

I had an interviewer nearly half my age ask me once "How do you usually get along with the people you work with?" To which I answered honestly: "I've gotten on just fine with pretty much everybody I've ever worked with." She said "Pretty Much?" and I replied "Well, sure - every once in a while you run across somebody who's just determined not to like you, you can't really do anything about that." and in that instant, even I could see from the expression on her face, that answer had cost me the job.

What I was supposed to say was "Oh, yeah, I can get along with ANYBODY." Even though it's impossible to change the negative attitudes and behaviors of others, if they are determined to sullenly resist. Getting that job was dependent on being able to tell a bald-faced LIE.

But if I was willing to glibly lie about something so obviously untrue, why would I stop there? Why not keep lying once I'm hired - about my expense reports, about my departmental budget, about anything? If you hire an entire staff of liars, you should expect to spend most of your time rushing around putting out fires, until they rob you blind and your business collapses. Dishonesty was a job requirement, after all.

This is the corporate mentality that has been for 30 years, and is currently eroding the United States economy into a state of collapse. A thought process so deceptive and self-serving, that it's driven by greed, to consume it's own base and infrastructure. They all see the end coming, but every one of them is packing his or her Golden Parachute (as if their money is going to mean anything when the dollar bottoms out) and to hell with the mountain of bodies they climbed to get to the top. They're avaricious morons. But what amazing social skills they have.

To be fair, in the interviewer's case, she did ask how you "usually get along," meaning you didn't have to talk about the few times where you couldn't.

Anyone know a good lawyer? We might have grounds for a class action lawsuit against the creators of these tests and employers who use them, under the grounds of violating the disabilities act.

Willard, I don't understand the structure of this test.

If I strongly agree with something do I not have some minor disagreement?

If I strongly disagree do I not have some minor agreement?

If I have some agreement do I not have some disagreement as well?

If I have some disagreement do I not have some agreement as well?

Logic would say to put down two answers. If I agree with the question in 99 cases out of 100 then why doesn't both agreement and disagreement apply? I have 99% agreement and 1% disagreement.

I base it off of the concept of the syllogism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism

The only way I can have one answer would be to have a universal affirmative or a universal negative.

Let's say I have this.

Some a are b. It has to stand to reason that some a are not b.

I don't get it. How do I interpret the structure of this test?

^^ Reading cheat sheets for this test (google "unicru"), they want you to have strong feelings on everything, so the answer they are looking for is either strongly agree or strongly disagree, the less strong alternatives are always "wrong".

1. How accurate are these cheat sheets?

2. What is the logical structure of the test? How does the way one is supposed to answer the questions derive from the structure of the test based upon the assumptions I have based upon my perceptions. If my assuptions are faulty how are the faulty?

Obsessively hair-split much? You're assuming that I have quoted verbatim a question that was asked 15 years ago. It is possible that the wording was slightly different than that, but the intent was the same.




Beats me. It sounds a lot like the way the questions in the MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory) are worded, which is a test used to screen for various psychopathologies. The funny thing about that test is they give you a lot of outrageously bizarre statements, like: "If someone flipped me off at a red light, I would follow them home and kill them."

Who the hell is going to put down "strongly agree" as their answer? I mean, even if that were your instinctual response, would you put it down in a written document that might get you committed to a nuthatch? I always found that supremely amusing. But I suppose it does let you know right away who the raving loonies are.

Actually, emotions are extremely important. For example, with no emotions, you would have no motivation to do anything, think anything, or say anything, except perhaps the most basic instincts like eating. Problems tend to arise when you suffer emotional dysregulation, which makes it difficult to control your motivation.

EDIT: There is also apathy, which is the lack of emotion.

Returning veterans with PTSD are also affected, because the tests look for low levels of neuroticism:

http://employmentassessment.blogspot.co ... rning.html

I hope I never have to do those if I look for a job. If I did I'd fail them. I won't lie on them.

Sears would do those type of tests, don't know if they still do. Sometimes, I wondered if I put down "strongly agree" to some of the answers, would anybody believe it? I never did work at Sears and I started shopping at Sears less often. But did that test really do any good? as I don't think Sears is going to be around much longer.

I'd never want to work at Sears. I read about them online and was told about them by a real life friend that worked there. She told me that they expect you to get lots of people to apply for their credit card and if you don't they cut your hours and don't tell you why.

I think I'd have a really hard time working in any cashier position but it would make it even worse being made to try to promote things like credit cards or those loyalty cards that a lot of stores have now. Most customers probably already have them or don't want them.

That's right, I wonder if Sears is going to last to the end of this year.

Back in the 70's, though, if any store was good for an aspie it would be Sears, with their Craftsman tools and Kenmore appliances. I loved looking at all the new tools, home accessories and appliances they had.