INDIVIDUAL REPORT - Psychometric Testing for ...app.revelian.com/re/images/example_report/Individual.pdfINDIVIDUAL REPORT KATHERINE ADAMS Report Date: 29 Aug 2016 Position: Example

INDIVIDUAL REPORTKATHERINE ADAMS

Report Date: 29 Aug 2016

Position: Example Position

Client/Company: ABC Company

Assessments IncludedReport Interpretation

ModuleAssessment

DateResults

Valid Until

Cognitive Ability Test (RCAT) 16 Aug 2016 16 Aug 2017

Work Reliability Scale (RWRS) R 16 Aug 2016 16 Aug 2017

Work Safety Assessment - Short Form (RWSA-SF) 16 Aug 2016 16 Aug 2017

Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) 16 Aug 2016 16 Aug 2017

Theme Park Hero (RTPH) 16 Aug 2016 16 Aug 2017

Behavioural Profile (RBP) * 16 Aug 2016 16 Aug 2017

Please note:

R Candidate has previously completed this assessment and has released their results to be considered for this position.

* This assessment does not contribute to the overall suitability presented in the Position Report or in the assessment summary section of this report.

This multi-media presentation provides a guided tour of the individual candidate report content and structure to support the interpretation of the results. Please note this presentation relates to a generic example and not the actual candidate listed above.

Notice To Report Recipient(s)

Information contained within this report is private and confidential, and is provided on the basis that its recipient(s) will use it responsibly.

Revelian's involvement in the recruitment process is limited to providing the prospective employer with information regarding the relevant

attributes of candidates as measured by Revelian assessments. It is the prospective employer who makes final selection decisions.

Suitability scores within this report are based only on the assessment scores, and on the weightings attached to those scores. Revelian

can not guarantee that the weights assigned within this report are appropriate for the position. As some assessments were completed

unsupervised by this candidate, Revelian can not guarantee that their responses are their own. Supervised testing, where possible, is

recommended in this case.

Revelian recommends that assessment information be considered along with information gained from other sources when making final

selection decisions.

REPORT INTERPRETATION AND SUPPORT

Revelian provides the following supporting resources and options to ensure appropriate interpretation of

candidate assessment reports.

Support Resources

1. Report Interpretation Modules appear throughout this report to help you interpret the information

presented. Please click on the link provided to view an online presentation providing a generic

overview of the content and structure of the report. The modules are designed to help support your

interpretation of the results and ultimate recruitment decisions.

Please click the media icon to view the Individual Candidate Report Interpretation Presentation

(https://app.revelian.com/reports/individual/).

2. eLearning Modules provide you with a comprehensive overview of each assessment, including

assessment theory, structure of the assessment, candidate experience and interpretation of results.

These training modules are accessed via the 'Learning Centre' in your Revelian Workspace. Please

revisit these modules as often as you like as an ongoing reference.

3. Psychologist Support is available as needed. To arrange further consultation with a Revelian

Psychologist, please telephone 1300 137 937 (within Australia), 0800 046 9690 (within United

Kingdom) or +61 7 3552 5700 (outside Australia) during business hours. Alternatively, please

email: [email protected].

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

The following report provides information regarding Katherine Adams's results on Revelian's Cognitive Ability

Test (RCAT), Revelian's Work Safety Assessment - Short Form (RWSA-SF), Revelian's Work Reliability

Scale (RWRS), the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), Revelian's Theme Park

Hero (RTPH) and Revelian's Behavioural Profile (RBP). Katherine is currently being considered for the

position of Example Position.

Katherine's overall performance can be described by a suitability score, which takes into account her

performance across each of the assessments. In determining this suitability score, the assessments have

been weighted such that the RCAT has been weighted higher than the RWRS, RWSA-SF, MSCEIT, RTPH

and RBP.

Candidate Suitability Score: 97 out of a possible 100

Katherine's scores on the assessments can be briefly described as follows.

Level of Suitability Assessment Score

RCAT RWRS RWSA-SF MSCEIT RTPH

Overall Suitability86%

V64% 79% 82% 95%

Assessment Score

RCAT Exceeded 86% of a sample of employed adults

RWRS Exceeded 64% of a sample of employed adults

RWSA-SF Exceeded 79% of a sample of employed adults

MSCEIT Exceeded 82% of general comparison

RTPH Exceeded 95% of a sample of employed adults

RBP* Natural Style: ICD (Stimulator)Adapted Style: I

* Please note: This assessment does not contribute to the suitability score or classification presented above.

The details of other candidates applying for the position can be accessed by viewing the position report,

available by clicking here.

This report is based on the results of the RCAT, RWSA-SF, RWRS, MSCEIT, RTPH and RBP. These

assessments provide insight into Katherine's cognitive ability, safety at work, reliability, emotional intelligence,

ability to solve a series of game based puzzles and unique behavioural style. Other qualities relevant to

Katherine's suitability for the role may be best understood using additional selection methods, such as

additional psychological assessment, interviews and reference checks. In making a final selection decision,

Revelian recommends that all available information about the candidate be considered.

The remainder of this report provides further information regarding Katherine's assessment results.

REVELIAN COGNITIVE ABILITY TEST

REPORT INTERPRETATION

For further details regarding the interpretation of the results presented below, please view the following online

Report Interpretation presentation. This learning module explains how to interpret this specific section of the

report and extract additional meaning from the results presented.

Please click the media icon to view the Revelian Cognitive Ability Report Interpretation Presentation(https://app.revelian.com/reports/ocat/).

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The RCAT was used because of the compelling body of research that has established that measures of

general cognitive ability are the most powerful predictors of how a candidate will perform overall at work. As

an indication of this power, recent research has found that the addition of cognitive ability assessments to an

existing selection procedure based on job interviews alone increased the ability to predict future work

performance by 24%.

Cognitive ability tests work by "sampling" abilities that are of key importance to effective work performance.

Such abilities include the ability to:

• Acquire information,

• Retain information,

• Organise information, and

• Apply information.

Candidates assessed to have higher levels of these information-processing abilities are more likely to:

• Develop a greater knowledge of the job and develop such knowledge more rapidly,

• Make effective decisions,

• Successfully reason and solve problems, and

• Respond appropriately to new or complex situations.

A candidate's level of cognitive ability therefore represents a very important piece of information to consider

for those responsible for making decisions regarding personnel selection.

ANALYSIS

After Katherine completed the RCAT, her test score was calculated by adding the number of correct

responses that she provided to the various types of test questions. This single score therefore reflects her

overall performance on the test.

On its own however, a test score does not provide a meaningful indication of a candidate's level of cognitive

ability. For this reason, Katherine's score was compared with those of a sample of adults employed in a broad

cross-section of mainly professional positions. This comparison group was the most appropriate to the

position of those available.

To convey how well Katherine performed on the test relative to the comparison group, her score is described

in a number of ways. Firstly, Katherine's score was assessed in terms of the percentage or proportion of the

comparison group that it exceeded. Additionally, Katherine's score was given a classification to describe the

range in which it fell. As is shown below, these classifications represent different parts of the "normal" curve

that is produced when the scores of large groups of people are plotted.

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION

As a result of completing the RCAT, Katherine's level of cognitive ability has been assessed and is able to be

examined in relation to the comparison group. Table 1 summarises Katherine's test performance.

Table 1 - Katherine Adams's Cognitive Ability Test Performance Relative to The Comparison Group

RCAT Score Level of Overall Cognitive Ability Comparison Score

Employed Adults

28 VAbove Average

(86%)

V Verification testing has confirmed score

V Verification testing has resulted in a score decrease

NV Test score is NOT verified

As Table 1 shows, Katherine performed very well in relation to the comparison group. Specifically, she

achieved a score that was higher than 86% of those obtained by the sample of employed adults and fell

within the Above Average range. Katherine's very favourable performance in relation to this comparison

group indicates that in terms of cognitive ability, she would be well suited for the position of Example Position.

SCORE VERIFICATION

Katherine was initially tested remotely under unsupervised conditions, and was re-tested for verification

purposes under supervised conditions on 16 August 2016. This is indicated by the "V" that appears beside

the candidate's score in Table 1 of this report. The verification test included different questions, which were

matched in format and difficulty to the questions in the original test that the candidate completed. This

process of retesting is used to confirm the validity of the candidate's original test scores. Katherine's original

test score was confirmed when retested, as indicated in Table 2. Her original score has therefore been

verified and retained in this report.

Table 2 - RCAT Score Verification.

Candidate Name Score Status

Katherine Adams Score Confirmed

TEST TAKING BEHAVIOUR FOR KATHERINE

The following information relates to the test taking behaviour from Katherine's original assessment sitting.

The RCAT includes verbal, numerical and abstract questions, each of which assesses the candidate's overall

level of cognitive ability. Of the total number of questions answered correctly by Katherine, 33% were verbal,

33% were numerical, and 33% were abstract. Of the total number of questions attempted, 33% were verbal,

33% were numerical, and 33% were abstract. On average Katherine spent 10 seconds answering each

question.

A candidate's overall level of cognitive ability, as shown in Table 1, is the best predictor of subsequent job

performance. As such, recruitment decisions should be based on the candidate's overall percentile score,

rather than their performance on the specific question types. It is also important to note that scores on the

verbal, numerical and abstract questions reflect an ability to acquire, process and utilise these types of

information, rather than any knowledge, skill or experience in these areas.

Important Considerations

Although cognitive ability tests are accurate, a candidate's results may be influenced by such things as the

environment in which the test was taken and their comfort with the testing process. Therefore, the candidate's test

score should be considered as an approximation of their level of cognitive ability.

Finally, it is important to note that this assessment requires a year 10 level of Australian English. The results of

candidates who do not possess a year 10 level of Australian English may be adversely affected by their English

proficiency. In such cases, the candidate's score will reflect a combination of their English skills and cognitive ability,

and will not provide an accurate approximation of their level of cognitive ability.

REVELIAN WORK RELIABILITY SCALE





Please click the media icon to view the Revelian Work Reliability Scale Report Interpretation Presentation (https://app.revelian.com/reports/owrs/).


The RWRS assesses attitudes towards theft and dishonesty ranging from lenient or accepting to strict or

severe. Previous research has demonstrated a relationship between these attitudes and counterproductive

workplace behaviours such as theft, absenteeism and property damage. Specifically, employees with stricter

attitudes are more reliable, and tend to engage in less counterproductive behaviour.

The RWRS also assesses aspects of candidates' response patterns to ensure the accuracy of the resulting

work reliability score and its appropriate interpretation. The extent to which Katherine understood the

questions that were asked of her and how carefully she completed the measure are indicated by her score on

the Consistency scale. The extent to which Katherine presented herself in an overly positive fashion is

assessed by the Positive Self Presentation scale. A response style that is too positive can indicate that

undesirable attitudes or tendencies relevant to the assessment have been suppressed by the candidate.

ANALYSIS

Katherine's responses on the Consistency and Positive Self Presentation scales indicate that she understood

what was being asked of her and answered in an open and candid manner. As a result, confidence can be

placed in the accurate and appropriate interpretation of her resulting work reliability score.

Table 3 - Validity Checks

Scale Rating

Consistency Valid

Positive Self Presentation Valid

After Katherine completed the RWRS, her work reliability score was calculated from the various responses

she provided to the assessment questions. A single score was derived from these responses and reflects her

overall rating on this assessment. This score was then compared with scores from a selected group of

people. The group selected for comparison was the most appropriate to the position of those available.

The group used for comparison was:

A sample of Employed Adults

This comparison provides insight into the candidate's level of work reliability by contrasting it with those of

people employed in a broad cross-section of positions.

Katherine's score is described in terms of the percentage of the comparison group that it exceeds. This

percentage score was then given a classification from Far Below Average to Far Above Average. As is shown

below, these classifications represent different parts of the normal curve that is produced when the scores of

large groups of people are plotted.


Table 4 - Candidate's Test Result Relative to the Comparison Group

Level of Reliability Comparison Score

Employed Adults

Work Reliability Score Average(64%)

As a result of completing the RWRS, Katherine's work attitudes have been assessed and are able to be

examined. As displayed in Table 4 above, Katherine achieved a score that exceeded 64% of other scores

within the Employed Adults group. This placed her within the Average range.

As discussed previously, strong research evidence has demonstrated the link between individual work-

related attitudes and subsequent employee behaviour. Katherine's score on this assessment, when

compared to the attitudes of other workers, highlights an average risk of counterproductive behaviour in the

workplace.

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

Should Katherine's application for the position of Example Position be considered further, it is advisable that

these results be used as a means to promote discussion with her prior to making a selection decision. For

example, where a work reliability score is low, such discussions have the potential to reveal additional

induction content, supervision or on-the-job training requirements for that candidate.

With regard to these discussions, Katherine's responses suggest that some specific topics may need to be

investigated. A suggested positioning statement and recommended interview questions are provided below to

help guide this discussion.

Interview Question Positioning Statement

As part of the recruitment process you completed the Revelian Work Reliability Scale. This assessment asked you to indicate your attitudes and opinions toward a variety of situations related to employee honesty and reliability. The following questions are derived from your responses to this assessment.

Scale Recommended Interview Questions

RELIABILITY In what situations do you think it's appropriate for an employee to deceive their employer?

What things do you believe people are occasionally tempted to take, without permission, from their workplace?


A measure of work reliability can provide a useful indication of the type of behaviours an employee will exhibit within

their place of work. However, other factors will also contribute to an employee's conduct and productivity.

Appropriate work demands, a safe working environment, adequate supervision and resources are all important in

ensuring an employee performs at their optimal level. The particular job characteristics and working environment of

the position of Example Position therefore must be considered in addition to Katherine's assessment results.

REVELIAN WORK SAFETY ASSESSMENT - SHORT FORM





Please click the media icon to view the Revelian Work Safety Assessment - Short Form Report Interpretation Presentation (https://app.revelian.com/reports/owsasf/).


The RWSA-SF assesses an employee's attitudes towards a number of factors relevant to safety at work.

These factors include taking personal responsibility for safety, avoiding risks, and coping with stress. Based

on these factors, the RWSA-SF provides a reliable indication of the likelihood that a candidate will be

involved in accidents or cause injury to themselves or others while at work. Selecting candidates who score

favourably will assist in reducing the costs of unsafe work behaviour, such as injury, employee absenteeism,

compensation claims and property damage.

The RWSA-SF also assesses aspects of candidates' response patterns to ensure the accuracy of the

resulting work safety score and its appropriate interpretation. The extent to which Katherine understood the

questions that were asked of her and how carefully she completed the measure are indicated by her score on

the Consistency scale. The extent to which Katherine presented herself in an overly positive fashion is

assessed by the Positive Self Presentation scale. A response style that is too positive can indicate that

undesirable attitudes or tendencies relevant to the assessment have been suppressed by the candidate.

ANALYSIS

Katherine's responses on the Consistency and Positive Self Presentation scales indicate that she understood

what was being asked of her and answered in an open and candid manner. As a result, confidence can be

placed in the accurate and appropriate interpretation of her resulting work safety score.

Table 5 - Validity Checks

Scale Rating

Consistency Valid

Positive Self Presentation Valid

After Katherine completed the RWSA-SF, her work safety score was calculated from the various responses

she provided to the assessment questions. A single score was derived from these responses and reflects her

overall rating on this assessment. This score was then compared with scores from a selected group of

people. The group selected for comparison was the most appropriate to the position of those available.

The group selected for analysis was:

A sample of Employed Adults

This comparison provides insight into the candidate's level of safety awareness by contrasting it with those of

people employed in a broad cross-section of positions.

To convey how well Katherine performed on the assessment, her score is described in a number of ways.

Firstly, Katherine's score is described in terms of the percentage of the comparison group that it exceeds.

This percentage score was then given a classification from Far Below Average to Far Above Average. As is

shown below, these classifications represent different parts of the normal curve that is produced when the

scores of large groups of people are plotted.


Table 6 - Candidate's Test Result Relative to the Comparison Group

Level of Safety Awareness Comparison Score

Employed Adults

Work Safety Score Average(79%)

As a result of completing the RWSA-SF, Katherine's level of safety awareness has been assessed and is

able to be examined. As displayed in Table 6 above, Katherine achieved a Work Safety score that exceeded

79% of other scores within the Employed Adults group. This placed her within the Average range.

As discussed previously, strong research evidence has demonstrated the link between individual work safety

attitudes and subsequent safety awareness in the workplace. Katherine's score on this assessment, when

compared to the attitudes of other workers, highlights an average risk of unsafe behaviour in the workplace.


A measure of safety attitudes can provide a useful indication of the likelihood of an employee approaching their

tasks in a safe and responsible manner. However, other factors will also contribute to an employees' propensity for

safe behaviour and susceptibility to workplace accidents. An unsafe work environment (e.g. faulty machinery) and

unsafe behaviour by fellow employees (e.g. misuse of machinery) are two such factors that may also contribute.

The working environment of the position of Example Position therefore must be considered in addition to

Katherine's assessment results.

Should Katherine's application for the position of Example Position be considered further, it is advisable that these

results be used as a means to promote discussion with her prior to making a selection decision. For example,

where a safety score is low, such discussions have the potential to reveal additional induction content, supervision

or safety-related training requirements for that candidate.

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE TEST (MSCEIT)





Please click the media icon to view the Emotional Intelligence Test Report Interpretation Presentation(https://app.revelian.com/reports/msceit/).


The MSCEIT represents an ability-based measure of emotional intelligence, which assesses an individual's

capacity to understand their own and others emotions and to use emotions to enhance thought. In particular,

emotional intelligence, as measured by the MSCEIT, measures a candidate's ability to:

• Recognise their own and others' emotions,

• Generate and use emotions in problem solving,

• Understand emotions and how emotions may change, and

• Manage their own and others' emotions.

As an ability-based measure of emotional intelligence, the MSCEIT estimates a candidate's emotional

intelligence by asking them to solve problems about emotions, or problems that require the use of emotion.

Research indicates that emotional intelligence, as measured by the MSCEIT, is a good predictor of job

performance. Individuals with high scores on the MSCEIT are better able to perceive, identify and manage

emotions in themselves and others, making them effective at managing those around them. Accordingly,

emotional intelligence is of particular importance in jobs that involve working as part of a team, customer

service, or displaying leadership behaviours.

ANALYSIS

After Katherine completed the MSCEIT, her responses were calculated to yield a Total Emotional Intelligence

score, two area scores: Experiential and Strategic Emotional Intelligence, and four branch scores: Perceiving

Emotions, Facilitating Thought, Understanding Emotions, and Managing Emotions. In addition, eight

individual task scores are also presented. Please note that when interpreting these scores, the Total

Emotional Intelligence score should be considered as most reliable while the overall profile of the candidate's

emotional intelligence should be considered by reviewing the Branch scores. Caution should be used when

reviewing the task scores presented, as this information is only intended to provide further detail regarding

Katherine's responses and should not be used for decision making purposes.

The graphic below displays the relationships between these scores.

To convey how well Katherine performed on the test her score is described in a number of ways. Firstly,

Katherine's score was compared with scores achieved by a large group of people who have also completed

this measure. Additionally, Katherine's score was given a classification to describe the range in which it fell.

As is shown below, these classifications represent different parts of the "normal" curve that is produced when

the scores of large groups of people are plotted.


Total Score

The following table displays Katherine's Total Emotional Intelligence score.

Table 7 - Total Score

Level of Overall Emotional Intelligence

Comparison Score

General Comparison

MSCEIT Total Score Above Average

(82%)

This global score represents a convenient summary of Katherine's performance on this measure. This score

indicates Katherine's overall capacity to understand her own and others emotions and use emotions to

enhance thought.

As discussed previously, research evidence has demonstrated the link between emotional intelligence and

job performance in certain positions. Katherine's overall score on this assessment, when compared to the

general comparison group, highlights an above average level of emotional intelligence.

Area Scores

Katherine's Experiential Emotional Intelligence and Strategic Emotional Intelligence scores are displayed in

the table below.

Table 8 - Area Scores

Area Emotional Intelligence Area Scores Comparison Score

General Comparison

Experiential Above Average

(88%)

Strategic Average (66%)

The Experiential Emotional Intelligence score is derived from Katherine's performance on the Perceiving

Emotions and Facilitating Thought branches and focuses on the identification of emotion and its interaction

with thought. Strategic Emotional Intelligence is derived from Katherine's performance on the Managing

Emotions and Understanding Emotions branches and is focused on an understanding of how emotions

develop over time and how they are managed and suited to particular social situations.

Branch Scores

Katherine's branch scores are displayed in the table below.

Table 9 - Branch Scores

Branch Emotional Intelligence Branch Scores Comparison Score

General Comparison

Perceiving Emotions Far Above Average

(95%)

Facilitating Thought Average (67%)

Understanding Emotions Average (72%)

Managing Emotions Average (49%)

Perceiving Emotions

The Perceiving Emotions branch is concerned with Katherine's capacity to accurately recognise her own

emotions and the emotions of others around her. Emotional perception involves paying attention to and

accurately decoding emotional signals in facial expressions, tone of voice and artistic expression. Although

the MSCEIT measures the appraisal of emotions in others and in images, evidence suggests that such

appraisal is also related to accurate perceptions of emotions in oneself.

Facilitating Thought

The Facilitating Thought branch is focused on Katherine's ability to employ feeling to enhance cognitive

thought and, as a result, harness more effective problem-solving, reasoning, decision-making and creative

ability. Emotions can assist in prioritising tasks by identifying those tasks of greater importance. Emotions

also influence the way we think (e.g., positive thoughts are generated when one is happy). Differing emotions

therefore encourage a variety of perspectives while also fostering creative thinking.

Understanding Emotions

The Understanding Emotions branch reflects Katherine's capacity to define and label emotions and reason

with them effectively. Understanding what leads to various emotions is a critical component of emotional

intelligence as knowledge of how emotions combine and change over time is important in interactions with

others.

Managing Emotions

The Managing Emotions branch assesses Katherine's ability to manage emotions successfully. This entails

remaining open to emotional information at important times, and closed to emotions when they may not be

relevant. Managing emotions also refers to using emotions in a considered and rational manner, rather than

choosing to act without the appropriate degree of thought.

Task Scores

Katherine's performance on each task of the MSCEIT is presented in the table below. It is important to note

that task scores have much greater variability than other MSCEIT scores. Greater emphasis should therefore

be placed on interpreting a candidate's overall, area and branch scores.

Table 10 - Task Scores

Task Emotional Intelligence Task Scores Comparison Score

General Comparison

Faces Far Above Average

(99%)

Pictures Average (71%)

Facilitation Average (66%)

Sensations Average (62%)

Changes Average (72%)

Blends Average (61%)

Emotion Management Average (61%)

Emotional Relations Average (38%)

The Faces task asked Katherine to identify how a person was feeling based on their facial expression. The

Pictures task asked Katherine to indicate to what extent certain images or landscapes expressed various

emotions. Both tasks contribute to the Perceiving Emotions branch of the MSCEIT.

The Facilitation task measured Katherine's knowledge of how moods interact and support thinking and

reasoning. The Sensations task asked Katherine to compare different emotions to different sensations, such

as light, colour and temperature. Both tasks contribute to the Facilitating Thought branch of the MSCEIT.

The Changes task measured Katherine's understanding of conflicting emotions in certain situations and how

emotions transition from one situation to another (e.g., how contentment can change to joy). The Blends task

refers to Katherine's ability to connect situations with certain emotions (e.g., linking a situation involving loss

to sadness). Both tasks contribute to the Understanding Emotions branch of the MSCEIT.

The Emotion Management task asked Katherine to rate the effectiveness of certain actions in a situation

requiring the regulation of emotions. The Emotional Relations task asked Katherine to evaluate the

effectiveness of different actions in achieving an outcome involving other people. Both tasks contribute to the

Managing Emotions branch of the MSCEIT.

Supplementary Scales

Supplementary measures have also been included in the MSCEIT to provide additional information and

understanding of Katherine's results and response style. This includes the Scatter score and Positive-

Negative Bias score.

Scatter Score

The MSCEIT Scatter score provides an indication of the amount of fluctuation among a candidate's task

scores. High Scatter scores indicate large discrepancies in the results for the different tasks. Such scores

may indicate a large degree of variation in skill across different elements of emotional intelligence. Moderate

Scatter scores show a typical amount of variation in task results. Low Scatter scores indicate very consistent

scores across the tasks.

Katherine's results depict a consistency in the scores she achieved across the emotional intelligence tasks.

This is further evident when reviewing the task scores achieved by Katherine.

Table 11 - Scatter Variation

Scale Rating

Scatter Score Low

Positive-Negative Bias Score

The Positive-Negative Bias score provides an indication of a candidate's tendency to respond to pictorial

stimuli with either positive or negative emotions. Positive Bias scores indicate a more than typical tendency to

respond positively to the face and picture items. Neutral Bias scores indicate a typical amount of positive and

negative responding. Negative Bias scores indicate a more than typical amount of negative responding to the

face and picture items.

Katherine's results depict a typical amount of positive and negative responding to face and picture items

throughout the assessment. Katherine can therefore be generally expected to read emotional situations

accurately and offer a realistic and balanced appraisal of those situations.

Table 12 - Positive-Negative Tendency

Scale Rating

Positive-Negative Bias Score Neutral


Emotional intelligence has demonstrated strong links with job performance across a wide array of occupations and

industries. It's greatest power however lies in predicting performance in jobs that involve working with others.

Therefore, an assessment of emotional intelligence is most relevant when recruiting for positions that involve a high

degree of team work, customer service or management of others (e.g., supervisory or leadership roles).

Scoring of the MSCEIT is based on a predominately Western sample of respondents. Caution therefore should be

taken when interpreting the scores of candidate's from emerging or non-Western nations and non-native English

backgrounds, as cultural variation can influence scores. Similar caution is recommended when interpreting the

scores of candidates with physical or intellectual impairments that may adversely impact their performance on this

test.

A candidate's effective functioning in a particular position is a product of many qualities and not a result of their level

of emotional intelligence alone. As such, the MSCEIT should not be used in isolation when making recruitment

decisions. Revelian recommends that results of other psychological assessments and selection methods (e.g.,

structured interviews) be used to supplement the results provided by the MSCEIT to ensure a fair and valid

selection outcome.

REVELIAN THEME PARK HERO





Please click the media icon to view the Revelian Theme Park Hero Report Interpretation Presentation(https://app.revelian.com/reports/tph/).


Revelian's Theme Park Hero (RTPH) is a game based psychometric assessment measuring abilities and

traits that are important for job performance. In this assessment candidates assume the role of a theme park

manager where they are required to oversee the operation of the park and complete a series of fun and

engaging tasks. Details on the tasks Katherine completed are provided below.

Make a Splash Balloon Blast! Short Circuits Tricky Tokens

Solve a number of puzzles of increasing difficulty while constructing a water park.

Pop balloons for charity while ignoring a variety of distractions.

Fix the circuit boards by reconstructing rotated layouts.

Quickly work out which tickets have the highest values.

Candidates who score well on RTPH are more likely to have:

• Strong mental agility to quickly learn and process new information

• The ability to focus attention on important information

• Cognitive speed to carry out tasks under time pressure

• Spatial aptitude to visualise and understand abstract relationships

A candidate's score on RTPH is therefore an important piece of information to consider when making decisions

regarding personnel selection.

ANALYSIS

After Katherine completed Theme Park Hero, her score was calculated by analysing the game play data

captured during her assessment, including metrics such as speed and accuracy in responding, efficiency in

making decisions, and prioritising and executing tasks.

A single score was derived from her game play and reflects her overall performance on the assessment. This

score was then compared with those achieved by a large group of people who have also completed this

measure.

To convey how well Katherine performed on the assessment relative to the comparison group, her score is

described in a number of ways. Firstly, Katherine's score was assessed in terms of the percentage or

proportion of the comparison group that it exceeded. Additionally, Katherine's score was given a classification

to describe the range in which it fell. As is shown below, these classifications represent different parts of the

"normal" curve that is produced when the scores of large groups of people are plotted.


As a result of completing RTPH, Katherine's ability to solve a series of game based puzzles has been

assessed and combined into a total score. The total score is able to be examined in relation to the

comparison group. Table 13 summarises Katherine's performance.

Table 13 - Katherine's Theme Park Hero Performance Relative to The Comparison Group

Theme Park Hero Score Comparison Score

Employed Adults

Theme Park Hero ScoreFar Above Average

(95%)

As Table 1 shows, Katherine performed extremely well in relation to the comparison group. Specifically, she

achieved a score that was higher than 95% of those obtained by the employed adults group and fell within

the Far Above Average range. Katherine's favourable performance in relation to this comparison group

indicates that in terms of the abilities measured by RTPH, she has demonstrated an appropriate level of

suitability for the position.


Although assessments of this nature are accurate, a candidate's results may be influenced by such things as the

environment in which the test was taken and their comfort with the testing process. Therefore, the candidate's

assessment score should be considered an approximation of their ability to solve game based puzzles and should

be considered in conjunction with other information obtained during the recruitment process.

REVELIAN BEHAVIOURAL PROFILE


Revelian seeks to ensure that clients receive optimal benefit from the use of all report information provided.

For further details regarding the interpretation of the results presented within this report, please view the

following online Report Interpretation presentation. This learning module explains how to interpret the

different sections of this report, and extract additional meaning from the results presented.

Please click the media icon to view the Revelian Behavioural Profile Report Interpretation Presentation(https://app.revelian.com/reports/obp2/).

INTRODUCTION

Behavioural research suggests that people who understand themselves well in terms of their strengths and

weaknesses are most effective in the workplace. Behavioural assessment provides useful information relating

to a person's strengths and development areas, and thus can be used to assist people to adapt to their

environment.

The RBP analyses individual behavioural characteristics. That is, the way a person behaves, interacts, and

communicates with others. This report addresses four main behavioural styles and the unique characteristics

associated with each. The four primary behavioural styles measured by the RBP are:

Dominance: How people respond to problems and challenges Influencing: How people influence others to their point of view Steadiness: How people respond to the pace of the environment Compliance: How people respond to rules and procedures set by others

The following report is divided into two main sections:

Section A - Key Selection Considerations, which provides information relating to Katherine's behavioural

style, including an overview of her likely behaviour, the strengths she may bring to the role, and potential

development areas for her.

Section B - On the Job Considerations, which provides supplementary information relating to Katherine's

behavioural style in the areas of workplace behaviours, motivators, decision making style, and

communication style. This information may be useful during Katherine's induction into the organisation and

transition into the role.

NATURAL AND ADAPTED STYLE

The RBP also measures an individual's Natural and Adapted behavioural styles.

Natural style refers to how an individual behaves when they are most at ease, and conveys the manner in

which they would ideally approach work-related tasks. This style reflects the behaviours that are the easiest

and most comfortable for the individual.

However, individuals often need to modify their behaviour to meet the expectations of a role. How they feel

they need to adapt their behaviour is known as the 'Adapted style'.

Adapted style refers to how the individual feels they need to adjust to better cope with the requirements of

their current environment. While individuals are capable of modifying and adjusting their behaviour to meet

the demands of their surroundings, large behavioural adjustments over a long period of time are likely to

become stressful and difficult to sustain.

The information provided by the Natural style is more indicative of an individual's true behavioural preference

and identifies the basic, natural behaviour that they are likely to bring to the role. It is also worth noting that in

the recruitment context, a candidate's Adapted style reflects how they feel they need to behave in their

current (or most recent) role. For these reasons, it is recommended that greater emphasis be placed on an

individual's Natural style when considering their suitability for the position.

The information provided in this report is based on Katherine's Natural style, as measured by her responses

on the RBP. That is, how someone with Katherine's Natural style would approach the position.

SECTION A: KEY SELECTION CONSIDERATIONS

Based on Katherine's responses on the RBP, the sections below provide key information regarding her

Natural style and its application to the workplace. The information presented in this section includes a

behavioural overview, potential strengths, and suggested development areas. Use this information when

considering Katherine's suitability for the position of Example Position.

BEHAVIOURAL OVERVIEW

This section presents a general overview of Katherine's behavioural tendencies, and provides a broad

understanding of her preferred work style. That is, if left on her own, this section describes how Katherine

would choose to do the job. Please note that the information below describes the typical behaviour for

individuals with this behavioural style, without taking into account a person's ability to modify their behaviour

to fit the needs of a particular situation or environment. Therefore, use the information provided below to gain

a better understanding of Katherine's natural behaviour, together with other available application information

to determine her potential suitability for the role.

Katherine can be described as:

Extroverted, active, busy, creative, sociable, innovative, eager, tolerant, carefully daring, pleasantly decisive,

people-oriented, positive, open.

Motivators for Katherine:

Katherine likes variety, varying tasks, pleasant relationships and a cheerful working atmosphere. This type of

person likes to meet new people. She usually likes being in a role that influences people and makes them

enthusiastic. She tries to test herself in a positive way. She follows rules, avoids conflicts and does not want

to find herself in very complicated nor dangerous situations.

Katherine may try to avoid:

Katherine must concentrate to be thorough and attentive to fine details, but routine work in a single location

demands even more. She likes to meet people and discuss different things, but does not like to argue nor

push others. It is easy for her to enter new circumstances, but in a crisis situation Katherine does not like to

be alone.

Ideal manager for Katherine:

This type of person needs an inspiring manager/leader who regulates her speed so that she does not lose

her motivation. The manager/leader has to ensure that she does not cross the boundaries of her task nor

head in the wrong direction. The manager/leader should not become too familiar with her because then it

would be difficult to assess her results objectively.

Katherine's communication style:

She should be very inspiring, people-oriented and positive in her communications. As she is clever and

tolerant, she handles most people-situations easily. She can present her ideas in a logical way, although she

is best in presentations that jump from one topic to another and which influence peoples' emotions. Probably

she is not as patient a listener as one could be.

Katherine's decision making style:

She creates an impression of being a stronger and more self-confident person than she is. She is willing to

be quick to find new solutions - even though that contradicts a wish to avoid mistakes and be correct.

Moreover, she is not very eager to be responsible for unpleasant decisions.

TABLE OF DESCRIPTORS

Based on Katherine's Natural style, the Table of Descriptors in Figure 1 provides a graphical representation

of her behavioural profile according to the four factors of the RBP model: Dominance, Influencing,

Steadiness, and Compliance.

The line that runs through the centre of the Table of Descriptors is the Middle line which marks the centre

point for each factor. The table is divided into six zones, with a brief definition for each of these zones

provided on the table.

The shading on the Table of Descriptors indicates Katherine's behavioural profile based on the four factors.

Interpretation should be drawn from the overall shape of the profile when all four factors are considered in

relation to one another. The strength of a factor is determined by comparing its shading to that of other

factors. For example, if a factor has higher shading above the Middle line compared to other factors, this

factor would be considered more prominent for the individual. In addition, as the shading moves further away

from the Middle line, this represents the behaviour becoming more extreme and prominent, while shading

that is close to the Middle line indicates less extreme behaviour for that factor.

Each individual also has a core factor, which indicates the behavioural characteristics that are most prevalent

when interacting with this person. The factor with the highest level of shading above the Middle line in the

Table of Descriptors is Katherine's core factor.

Katherine's behavioural profile is displayed in the Table of Descriptors in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1 - Table of Descriptors

DOMINANCE INFLUENCING STEADINESS COMPLIANCE

Upper zone - indicates prominent behaviour

Upper Mid zone - indicates a tendency towards prominent behaviour

Mid zone - indicates less prominent behaviour

Mid zone - indicates less prominent behaviour

Lower Mid zone - indicates a tendency towards prominent behaviour

Lower zone - indicates prominent behaviour

Descriptors for Katherine

EnquiringInitiating

Goal-orientedWilful

AssertiveDirect

CharismaticInspiring

ExpressivePersuasiveEnergetic

Gregarious

HastyImpatient

UnstructuredEnergeticCapricious

Demonstrative

CarefulConventional

OrderlyYielding

Seeks information

The descriptors section at the bottom of each factor in the Table of Descriptors presents a list of words that

indicate the type of behaviours that are likely to be exhibited by Katherine. These words are generated based

on Katherine's unique profile.

Table 14 below provides a generic overview of each of the four factors to assist in the interpretation of

Katherine's profile.

Table 14 - The Four DISC Factors

Factor Definition Middle Line Behavioural Description

Dominance:Responding to problems and challenges

Above Active and assertive in gaining results, direct approach

Below Considered and passive approach to gaining results

Influencing:Influencing others to one's point of view

Above Verbally persuasive, social, people-oriented, outgoing

Below Reserved, cautious, introverted, matter of fact approach

Steadiness:Responding to the pace of the environment

Above Structured and organised, clearly defined boundaries

Below Freedom to operate, unstructured and unpredictable environment

Compliance:Responding to rules and procedures

Above Follows rules, aware of consequences of non-compliance

Below Establishes own rules and methods, 'do it my way' approach

VALUE TO THE ORGANISATION

This section of the report identifies the behavioural strengths Katherine is likely to bring to the job. These are

areas that don't require extra energy from Katherine and are likely to be quite natural for her. By looking at

these statements, one can identify her potential contribution to the organisation. In this way, providing the

opportunity for Katherine to use her strengths in the work environment will maximise the contribution she can

bring to the role and the organisation.

• Can be happy and spread good moods

• Can express one's idea

• Is easy to get along with

• Is open to new ideas and thoughts

• Likes to analyse and discuss

• Has a lively way of expressing one's opinion

• Wants to participate

• Recognises also other's feelings

• Follows instructions but not blindly

• Gets people in a good mood

• Does many things simultaneously

• Keeps up a positive speed

DEVELOPMENT AREAS

This section provides a list of potential development areas for Katherine without regard to a specific job.

Please note that these development areas are based on Katherine's Natural style and therefore don't take

into consideration the skills she has acquired to counter-balance these. The information provided below can

be used to formulate an action plan to facilitate Katherine's development in these areas.

• Makes conversation without making any constructive comments

• Is jumpy and not careful

• Is not direct; wants to please

• Doesn't have a long-range perspective in work

• Spends less time listening than talking

• Doesn't finish; goes to the next project

• Is overly optimistic

• Cannot be alone

• Doesn't get down to quarrelsome work

• Constantly wants something new and funny

• Spends all one's time discussing and pondering

• Lives in idealism and dreams

THE BEHAVIOURAL MAP

The Behavioural Map provides further insight into Katherine's behavioural style by plotting her Natural and

Adapted styles according to the combination of her most predominant factors. The Behavioural Map is

divided into segments which represent different combinations of the Dominance (D), Influencing (I),

Steadiness (S) and Compliance (C) factors and are each labeled with letters accordingly. The order of the

letters in each segment reflects the strength of influence, with the first letter being the most predominant. In

this way, an individual's Natural or Adapted style can be interpreted in relation to the section of the map it is

plotted in.

Interpretation of this figure should consider the interaction of the different behavioural factors, the strength of

these behaviours and the degree of flexibility depicted. More specifically, a style plotted further from the

centre of the map indicates that the individual is more strongly defined by the relative behavioural style, while

a style plotted closer to the centre of the map indicates that the individual's behaviour will reflect a

combination of several factors. That is, plotted styles that fall closer to the edge of the map in any direction

reflects more predominant and distinct characteristics, while more central styles tend to be less distinct to one

main factor and are in turn a more blended combination of behavioural attributes.

Further interpretation can be gained by comparing the position of Katherine's Natural and Adapted styles in

relation to one another as plotted on the Behavioural Map. The greater the distance between the Natural and

Adapted styles, the more she needs to modify her behaviour to meet the demands of her current or most

recent work environment.

Please use the details below to further support your interpretation of the labels on the Behavioural Map in

Figure 2 below.

Direct: Tendency to be active in the environment Indirect: Tendency to be passive in the environment Person-focus: Primarily concerned with people and relationships Task-focus: Primarily concerned with procedures and results

Figure 2 - The Behavioural Map

Katherine's Natural style: ICD (Stimulator)

Katherine's Adapted style: I

WORKING WITH OTHERS

The Behavioural Map consists of ten Team Roles that represent the role and behaviours individuals are most

likely to adopt when working in a team. The team roles include Specialist, Developer, Changer, Planner,

Influencer, Stimulator, Communicator, Participator, Supporter, and Assurer. The team role for Katherine

indicates how she would most naturally apply herself when working with others, and is determined based on

the relationship between the four behavioural factors (DISC) represented in the Table of Descriptors.

Katherine's Natural style team role: Stimulator

Natural Style Team Role

As a Stimulator, Katherine is an open and extroverted individual who thrives on interpersonal contact. She

works well with others where she can collaborate and brainstorm ideas, bringing positivity and optimism to

situations and tasks. She maintains an appropriate level of opinion and is mindful of how her actions

influence others. The Stimulator enjoys working on a variety of tasks and being included in the group's

decisions and activities. She recognises that things do not necessarily proceed as planned and so does not

always find it necessary to analyse things in detail.

SECTION B: ON THE JOB CONSIDERATIONS

The sections below provide on the job considerations relating to the preferences typically displayed by those

with similar behavioural styles to Katherine in the areas of workplace behaviour, motivation, decision making

and communication. Use this information to supplement the previous report content when considering

Katherine's suitability for the position of Example Position, during her induction into the organisation, and

transition into the role.

When considering Katherine's suitability for the role, take into account the degree to which the following

aspects of workplace behaviour, motivation, decision making, and communication are core components of

the position. That is, emphasis should only be placed on the factors that are core requirements for the

position of Example Position.

WORKPLACE BEHAVIOURS

The Workplace Behaviours section relates Katherine's natural behavioural preferences to common workplace

tasks and requirements. The information presented in this section should be used to gain an understanding of

the tasks that are likely to be natural strengths for Katherine, and those tasks that are likely to require more

energy from her.

Where Katherine's Natural style is plotted to the right and in the darker shading in Figure 3 below, the related

task is aligned with her behavioural preferences and is likely to be a natural strength of hers. Where

Katherine's Natural style is plotted to the left and in the lighter shading, the task is less aligned with her

Natural style. She would therefore most likely have to expend more energy to complete the task. A plotting

close to the centre of the continuum indicates that the related task is neither a clear natural strength nor a

task that requires more energy. Katherine would be expected to experience a moderate level of comfort when

completing this type of task.

Figure 3 - Workplace Behaviours

Consider the following in relation to the specific requirements of the role.

REQUIRES MORE ENERGY

NATURAL STRENGTH

VARIETY Having a variety of different responsibilities with limited instructions

NETWORKING Actively approaching and contacting a variety of people

PLANNING Thorough planning and working on projects until completion

THINKING Generating ideas based on facts and careful thought

ENCOURAGING Communicating with and encouraging others in a positive way

HELPING OTHERS Providing assistance and information to others

REPETITION Attention to details and working on repetitive tasks

FOLLOWING PROCEDURES

Following detailed instructions thoroughly

COMPETITION Competitive and goal-oriented approach to tasks

AUTONOMY Working autonomously with limited interaction with others

ACCURACY Producing highly accurate results by avoiding risks and mistakes

CHANGE Continuously looking for new ideas and improvements

Katherine's Natural style

MOTIVATION

Each individual has different goals and sources of motivation. This section of the report aims to highlight the

type of workplace environment that is likely to be a motivator for Katherine. This could then be used to gain

insight into possible ways in which to increase her motivation on the job.

Figure 4 below relates Katherine's Natural style to different working environments. In those workplace

environments where Katherine's Natural style is plotted to the right and in the darker shading, she is likely to

be comfortable and remain easily motivated. In those workplace environments where Katherine's Natural

style is plotted to the left and in the lighter shading, she is likely to be less comfortable and expend more

energy in remaining motivated. A plotting close to the centre of the continuum indicates that the related

workplace environment is neither a natural source of motivation, nor an environment that requires more

energy for Katherine in which to remain motivated.

Figure 4 - Motivation in Workplace Environments



NATURAL STRENGTH

HIGH-RISK Remaining motivated in a risky and uncertain environment

ROUTINE Remaining motivated in a predictable and steady environment

COOPERATION Remaining motivated in a team-oriented and collaborative environment

PEOPLE CONTACT Remaining motivated when regularly interacting with and motivating others

SPECIALISING Remaining motivated when required to specialise in one area


In addition to the workplace environments above, Katherine is likely to be motivated by the following factors

and will respond positively if these factors are present in her environment. It may be beneficial to review

these motivators with Katherine to highlight those that are most relevant for her.

• Lively and varying relationships

• Social network

• Varying assignments or environment

• Positive experiences

• Consciously making changes

• Moving and life opening up

• Reliable whole to be part of

• Success without taking risks

• Decision making concerning people

• People-oriented behaviour

• Inspiring work environment

• Friendly people

Based on Katherine's Natural style, the following factors are likely to decrease her motivation, and she will

respond positively if these factors are limited in her work environment. It may be beneficial to review these

demotivators with Katherine to highlight those that are most relevant for her.

• Need to be thorough

• Being overlooked

• Aggressive people

• Being pressured to make decisions

• Working with pure facts

• Having to be negative with people

• Lack of variety

• New experiences being prohibited

• Working without people contacts

• Arrogant people

• Organisation where everyone is bored

• Openness disappearing

DECISION MAKING

Most people have a preference for the way in which they make decisions. This section of the report aims to

highlight the decision making approaches that are likely to be natural strengths for Katherine, and those that

are likely to require more energy from her. Use the information provided in this section to gain insight into the

ways in which Katherine is most comfortable making decisions.

Figure 5 below relates Katherine's Natural style to different decision making approaches. The decision

making approaches where Katherine's Natural style is plotted to the right and in the darker shading are likely

to be easy for her to adopt. The decision making approaches where Katherine's Natural style is plotted to the

left and in the lighter shading are likely to require more energy for her to adopt. A plotting close to the centre

of the continuum indicates that the related decision making approach is neither a clear natural strength nor

something that requires more energy for Katherine to adopt.

It may be beneficial to review Katherine's decision making preferences with her and discuss how they relate

to the requirements of the position.

Figure 5 - Approaches to Decision Making



NATURAL STRENGTH

INDEPENDENT Autonomous decision making with limited supporting information

FACT-BASED Making decisions based on facts, rather than feelings or opinions

PEOPLE-BASED Making decisions that encourage and positively influence others

RULE-BASED Making decisions based on rules, instructions and guidelines

POSITIVE OUTCOME

Ensuring decisions are received favourably by others

FAST Fast decision making involving uncertainty and risk


COMMUNICATION

Most people have a preference for how they communicate with others, and how others communicate with

them. This section of the report aims to highlight the communication methods that are likely to be natural

strengths for Katherine, and those that are likely to require more energy from her. Suggestions for ways in

which to communicate with her to enhance interpersonal interactions are also provided.

Figure 6 below relates Katherine's Natural style to different approaches to communication. The

communication approaches where Katherine's Natural style is plotted to the right and in the darker shading

are likely to be easy for her to adopt. The communication approaches where Katherine's Natural style is

plotted to the left and in the lighter shading are likely to require more energy for her to adopt. A plotting close

to the centre of the continuum indicates that the related communication approach is neither a clear natural

strength nor something that requires more energy for Katherine to adopt.

Figure 6 - Communication Approaches



NATURAL STRENGTH

DIRECT Communicating in a direct, fact-oriented manner

INSPIRING Communicating in an inspiring way to enhance the performance of others

INFLUENCING Tailoring communication to specifically suit and positively influence the behaviour of others

BALANCED Balancing active communication with active listening

CAUTIOUS Considered communication based on logic and facts

FOCUSED Communicating logically without straying from the issue


The following information provides suggestions for communicating with Katherine to enhance interpersonal

effectiveness. It may be beneficial to discuss these suggestions with Katherine to identify particular

communication preferences and frustrations.

When communicating with Katherine:

• Maintain a positive atmosphere

• Allow her to express herself

• Take time to chat

• Be expressive

• Be enthusiastic

• Focus on the bigger picture

When communicating with Katherine, try to avoid:

• Presenting too many specific details

• Using closed body language

• Introducing negative or unconstructive criticism

• Taking everything too seriously

• Being pessimistic

• Setting restrictions to the conversation


This report describes Katherine's behavioural style, providing an indication of her likely approach to the work

environment. It does not present firm conclusions about her ability to perform in the role, and therefore should be

used in conjunction with other selection methods when considering Katherine's suitability for the position.

INDIVIDUAL REPORT - Psychometric Testing for ...app.revelian.com/re/images/example_report/Individual.pdfINDIVIDUAL REPORT KATHERINE ADAMS Report Date: 29 Aug 2016 Position: Example

Documents