ELLSI^x Hiring Assessment

Hire with confidence. ELLSI^x is a 6-factor personality assessment built for hiring decisions. It uses Thurstonian IRT forced-choice format — the same methodology used by leading assessment publishers to significantly reduce faking in selection contexts. Candidates respond to paired statements rather than rating themselves on a scale, making the "right" answer far less obvious.

Why Forced-Choice for Hiring?

Traditional Likert-scale personality assessments are vulnerable to impression management — candidates can inflate desirable traits by 0.5 to 0.75 standard deviations. In hiring contexts where candidates are motivated to present favorably, this distortion can undermine the validity of your selection decisions.

ELLSI^x uses forced-choice paired comparisons scored with Thurstonian Item Response Theory (Brown & Maydeu-Olivares, 2011). Each block pairs two statements from different personality factors, and candidates indicate which is more like them. This design reduces faking to approximately 0.1–0.2 standard deviations — a dramatic improvement over traditional formats.

The Six Experience Domains

Emotional Experience	How candidates respond to demands and pressure — from highly reactive to confident and even-tempered
Life Experience	How candidates approach structure and control — from spontaneous to conscientious and dependable
Learning Experience	How candidates engage with ideas — from practical and hands-on to curious and drawn to new concepts
Social Experience	How candidates relate to others — from reserved and introspective to interactive and influential
Interpersonal Experience	How candidates engage one-on-one — from direct and analytical to empathetic and warm
Honesty & Humility	Sincerity, fairness, greed avoidance, and modesty — the foundations of trust and ethical conduct

The Hiring Report

Each ELLSI^x report is written for hiring managers and includes:

ELLSI vs. ELLSI^x

	ELLSI	ELLSIx
Best for	Coaching & development	Hiring & selection
Factors	5 (Big Five)	6 (Big Five + Honesty & Humility)
Format	Likert scale	Forced-choice (Thurstonian IRT)
Faking resistance	Standard	High
Time	~15 minutes	~20 minutes
Report style	Development-focused	Hiring manager brief
Price	$19.95	$39.95

Both assessments can be used for either purpose. ELLSI is faster and more accessible — ideal when development insight is the goal. ELLSI^x is more rigorous — the right choice when candidates are motivated to present favorably and faking resistance matters.

Key Features

Assessment Process

1. Setup: Partner creates assessment order and selects the hiring report
2. Invitation: Candidate receives email with assessment link
3. Completion: 60-75 forced-choice blocks, approximately 20 minutes
4. Scoring: Thurstonian IRT with MAP estimation, percentile scoring against working adult norms
5. Report: Instant PDF hiring report with radar chart, factor interpretations, and interview questions

Research Foundation

ELLSI^x integrates three lines of research: the Five Factor Model of personality, the HEXACO model's Honesty-Humility dimension, and Thurstonian IRT forced-choice methodology.

Key Research

• Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2011). Item response modeling of forced-choice questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71(3), 460–502.
• Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2007). Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(2), 150–166.
• Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1–26.
• Cao, M., & Drasgow, F. (2019). Does forcing reduce faking? A meta-analytic review of forced-choice personality measures in high-stakes situations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(1), 75–94.
• Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(2), 329–358.
• Salgado, J. F., & Táuriz, G. (2014). The Five-Factor Model, forced-choice personality inventories and performance: A comprehensive meta-analysis. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(1), 3–30.

Common Questions