Watch: using psychometric tests to support diversity in hiring
4 minutes
An overview of how structured assessments reduce bias and help hiring teams build more diverse shortlists.
Introduction
Many organisations have real, specific goals for diversity and inclusion — covering gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic background, neurodiversity, and more. Yet despite these intentions, hiring processes often work against those goals without anyone realising it.
The problem is that most organisations rely on CV sifting and interviews as their primary selection tools — and both are among the most bias-prone methods in recruitment. Even more counterproductive: organisations with active D&I commitments often resist adding psychometric assessments, worried that tests will make things worse. In practice, the opposite is usually true.
Psychometric tests reduce reliance on the two most bias-prone selection tools — CVs and interviews — and replace subjective judgement with structured, consistent data. Used correctly, they improve both the fairness and quality of your hiring.
This article covers the three main types of psychometric test used in recruitment — aptitude tests, personality questionnaires, and situational judgement tests — and explains how each one can support your diversity and inclusion goals.
| Assessment type | What it measures | D&I benefit | Test Partnership product |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aptitude tests | Cognitive ability (reasoning, problem-solving) | Removes reliance on degree requirements, which disadvantage lower-SES candidates | Aptitude & ability tests |
| Personality questionnaires | Behavioural traits (conscientiousness, resilience, etc.) | No adverse impact across most protected groups; may advantage candidates from disadvantaged backgrounds | TPAQ-45 personality questionnaire |
| Situational judgement tests | Judgement and decision-making in work contexts | High face validity; good candidate acceptance; partial measure of both ability and behaviour | Situational judgement tests |
Aptitude testing
Aptitude tests measure specific cognitive abilities — verbal reasoning, numerical reasoning, logical reasoning, and related skills — which together reflect a person's general cognitive ability. They're typically multiple-choice assessments completed online, making them easy to use for early-stage screening, especially in high-volume hiring.
The primary advantage over CV sifting is exactly this: they measure ability directly, rather than using academic credentials as a proxy for it.
How aptitude tests support diversity and inclusion
The most bias-prone element of most screening processes is the use of educational requirements — UCAS points, degree classification, or institution. Research consistently shows that academic achievement is strongly influenced by socioeconomic background. Candidates from wealthier backgrounds benefit from tutors, private education, and more time to focus on studying — advantages that are unrelated to their actual cognitive ability.
Organisations use educational requirements as a proxy for cognitive ability. By measuring cognitive ability directly with an aptitude test, you can drop those requirements entirely — levelling the playing field without compromising the quality of your shortlist.
Test Partnership offers a full suite of aptitude and ability tests, including numerical, verbal, inductive, and critical reasoning — suitable for roles at any level. Results are automatically scored and ranked, so your team can focus on reviewing the strongest candidates rather than managing spreadsheets.
Personality questionnaires
Personality questionnaires measure the behavioural traits that underpin performance and fit in the workplace — things like conscientiousness, resilience, industriousness, and social skills. They use a Likert-scale format, giving candidates a straightforward and relatively low-pressure testing experience.
Research shows that many personality traits are consistent predictors of performance in the workplace, showing low to moderate associations — and in combination, the predictive value is considerably stronger.
When multiple relevant traits are measured together — for example, conscientiousness and resilience — the overall prediction of job performance is much stronger than any single trait in isolation. This makes personality questionnaires a powerful tool for improving quality of hire, not just a fairness measure.
How personality questionnaires support diversity and inclusion
Personality questionnaires are perhaps the most useful tool for diversity and inclusion in recruitment. Across most legally protected groups, they show no adverse impact — and some traits may even show slight advantages for candidates from disadvantaged backgrounds.
For example, there is evidence that candidates from disadvantaged backgrounds tend to develop higher resilience and industriousness as a result of their experiences. A well-designed personality questionnaire captures these traits accurately, giving those candidates a fair opportunity to demonstrate their suitability — something a CV or interview rarely allows.
Test Partnership's TPAQ-45 personality questionnaire measures 45 traits across the Big Five model, giving hiring teams a detailed, nuanced view of each candidate. It can be configured to weight the traits most relevant to a specific role, and results are benchmarked against relevant norm groups.
Improve diversity without sacrificing quality of hire
Our ability tests and personality questionnaire work together to give you a complete picture of every candidate.
Situational judgement tests
Situational judgement tests (SJTs) present candidates with realistic workplace scenarios and ask them to choose or rank the most appropriate course of action. Because good judgement requires both cognitive ability and the right behavioural characteristics, SJTs partially measure both at once — making them a versatile addition to a screening process.
Candidates are required to either rate, rank, or select the best course of action from a list of options — highlighting their real-world judgement and decision-making ability in a way that closely mirrors the job itself.
SJTs also tend to have high "face validity" — candidates find them intuitive and clearly relevant to the role. This makes them especially useful for organisations new to psychometric testing, as candidates and stakeholders quickly understand why they're being used. They work well at assessment centres too, serving as a realistic job preview alongside other exercises.
D&I considerations for situational judgement tests
When it comes to neurodiversity in particular, candidates with autism may struggle with certain situational judgement tests — especially those that require reasoning about hypothetical social situations.
SJTs require care from a neurodiversity perspective. Autistic candidates sometimes struggle with hypothetical scenarios or interpret questions very literally. For example, a question asking "which of these actions would you take?" may be difficult for a candidate who personally wouldn't take any of the listed actions. This doesn't reflect their ability — it reflects a mismatch between the test format and how they process information.
For this reason, SJTs should be thoroughly reviewed before use, and where possible, ability tests and personality questionnaires — which are generally more inclusive — should be the primary tools. SJTs work best as a supplementary assessment, not a standalone screen.
The table below summarises the D&I profile of all three assessment types, including where each one works best and where care is needed:
| Aptitude tests | Personality questionnaires | Situational judgement tests | |
|---|---|---|---|
| What it measures | Cognitive ability | Behavioural traits | Judgement and decision-making |
| D&I advantage | Removes SES-linked education requirements; measures ability directly | No adverse impact across most groups; may benefit candidates from disadvantaged backgrounds | High face validity; candidate-friendly format; partial measure of multiple traits |
| D&I consideration | Small group differences can exist; use alongside other tools rather than in isolation | Screen only for role-relevant traits to avoid inadvertent cultural bias | Neurodiverse candidates (particularly autistic) may struggle with hypothetical scenario formats |
| Best used for | Early-stage screening, especially in high-volume and early careers hiring | Any stage of selection; especially effective combined with ability tests | Supplementary assessment; realistic job previews at assessment centre stage |
Conclusion
Traditional hiring practices — CV sifting and unstructured interviews — are the most bias-prone selection tools available, yet they remain the default for most organisations. The irony is that hiring teams with strong D&I goals often resist adding assessments, when in fact psychometric testing is one of the most effective ways to reduce bias in the process.
Psychometric testing can help minimise bias in recruitment by reducing reliance on CV sifting and interviews. It removes the potential for assessor bias and levels the playing field — while also dramatically improving quality of hire.
Used together — aptitude tests to replace degree screening, personality questionnaires to assess behavioural fit, and SJTs where appropriate — psychometric assessments give every candidate a fair and consistent opportunity to demonstrate their suitability. That's better for diversity, and better for the quality of the people you hire.
Test Partnership's platform combines aptitude tests, the TPAQ-45 personality questionnaire, and situational judgement tests in one joined-up process — giving you fairer, more structured hiring from first screen to final shortlist.
If you'd like to discuss how our assessments could support your diversity and inclusion goals, our team of business psychologists is happy to help.
Build a fairer hiring process with Test Partnership
Speak to one of our expert business psychologists, or explore our full range of assessments to find the right fit for your process.
Primary author
Ben Schwencke
Chief Psychologist at Test Partnership. MSc in Organisational Psychology with over ten years experience in psychometric testing.
Contributed to by:
