<p>I always felt like I was choosing between spineless and heartless.</p>
<p>Let me guess 
SONY is the only company came to my mind that will institue this kind of test in TH…</p>
<p>The main things these tests look for is honesty and whether you are hot headed. Do not answer in the affirmative that you would assault someone even if it benefited the greater good.</p>
<p>From what I know about the test and how the results are reported, BowTieFratty’s answer is very oversimplified. And anyway, how would they know if I’m being honest?</p>
<p>The company is not Sony, but it is Japanese-owned.</p>
<p>While testing may be something new to many of you, it has been in place for decades. And yes, there are ways to test for lying. There has been some particularly insightful research on this with police applicants (Dr. Jay Gottesman).</p>
<p>Testing hit a bump in the road when is was seen to be discriminating against certain groups (primary African-Americans). The intelligence type tests were at the center of these controversies. A common example of a test that came under fire was the Wonderlic. It is still in use by the National Football League.</p>
<p>Testing most be “valid.” This is a term that is carefully defined in great detail under the law. It is is everyone’s best interests that any selection procedure be valid. Oddly, interviewing generally isn’t held to the same level of scrutiny. Do anyone of you truly believe that interviews are infallible? How about even consistent?</p>
<p>Is a test is valid, it measures something that is demonstrably related to performance on the job. It is a reliable and useful tool to access candidates. Contrary to some opinions, testing is often very cost effective as well. From a candidate’s perspective, it may help you avoid getting into the wrong situation.</p>
<p>Tests are not close to perfect but they can be an effective assessment tool.</p>