Validation reports
Elise Loopuijt avatar
Written by Elise Loopuijt
Updated over a week ago

Equalture games

At Equalture, we design gamified assessments of cognitive abilities, personality-, and behavioural traits, to help us with our mission of reducing bias in the hiring process. The traits that the games are designed to measure were selected based on research investigating good predictors of work performance, as well as what recruiters want to know about their candidates to make a hiring decision.

Why gamified assessments?

In short, traditional assessments have weaknesses that gamified assessments address. Traditional cognitive and personality assessments are often based on self-reports which are not always accurate (Fay et al., 2012; Sitzmann & Johnson, 2012) and provide a high risk of social desirability bias. Social desirability bias describes the tendencies of candidates to select responses they believe to be most desirable instead of those most indicative of their own behaviours (Chung & Monroe, 2003; Grimm, 2010). The goal of gamified assessments is to reduce the impact of bias by providing circumstances in which the player can either perform to the extent of their cognitive abilities or cannot identify the most socially desirable way of responding.

It is also important to note that socially desirable behaviour is prone to cultural bias. What is considered socially desirable will differ from culture to culture. For example, workplace behaviour and hierarchy can vary significantly, based on the cultural roots of a company. Therefore, people with different cultural backgrounds will likely provide different socially desirable answers.

Preventing bias

To ensure that our games are not biased against a particular subgroup of players, we statistically test whether factors like age, gender, culture, or educational background affect the scoring.

Validation reports

When designing a new tool to measure a trait or ability that has no pre-existing valid means of measurement, there are some statistical methods that can be used to test the data produced by it. The goal of these tests is to detect patterns that can be indicative of the validity of the tool. When another valid measurement tool already exists, the validity of a new tool can be established by comparing the results of the new tool to those of the pre-existing one. If both instruments measure the same underlying trait, the response patterns of people using them both should be similar. This then confirms the validity of the new tool.

In our validation studies, we collected data from participants who played our games and took part in an assessment of the same underlying trait that our game intends to measure. If you would like to read the validation reports of each of our games, you can click on the articles down below:


Chung, J., & Monroe, G. S. (2003). Exploring social desirability bias. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(4), 291-302.

Fay, A. J., Jordan, A. H., & Ehrlinger, J. (2012). How social norms promote misleading social feedback and inaccurate self‐assessment. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(2), 206-216.

Grimm, P. (2010). Social desirability bias. Wiley international encyclopedia of marketing.

Sitzmann, T., & Johnson, S. K. (2012). When is ignorance bliss? The effects of inaccurate self-assessments of knowledge on learning and attrition. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 192-207.

Did this answer your question?