Building a Bigger Toolbox: The Construct Validity of Existing and Proposed Measures of Careless Responding to Cognitive Ability Tests.

This article focuses on evaluating the construct validity of existing and newly proposed measures for detecting careless responding in cognitive ability tests, which are commonly used in personnel selection. Across three studies involving a total of 1,193 participants from low-stakes settings, the research found strong support for the validity of response-time and infrequency indices, and moderate support for instructed-response and intra-individual response variability (IRV) indices, while long-string and self-reported carelessness indices showed weaker validity. The findings suggest that expanding the assessment toolbox beyond traditional response-time and self-report measures can improve the detection of diverse careless responding behaviors, thereby enhancing the accuracy of ability test interpretations. The authors recommend using infrequency and response-time indices primarily, with IRV and long-string indices as supplementary tools, especially when specialized items are unavailable. Limitations include the exclusive focus on low-stakes contexts and the need for further research on careless responding in high-stakes settings and its impact on ability-criterion relationships.