Effects of the testing situation on item responding: cause for concern

The effects of faking on personality test scores have been studied previously by comparing (a) experimental groups instructed to fake or answer honestly, (b) subgroups created from a single sample of applicants or nonapplicants by using impression management scores, and (c) job applicants and nonapplicants. In this investigation, the latter 2 methods were used to study the effects of faking on the functioning of the items and scales of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. A variety of item response theory methods were used to detect differential item/test functioning, interpreted as evidence of faking. The presence of differential item/test functioning across testing situations suggests that faking adversely affects the construct validity of personality scales and that it is problematic to study faking by comparing groups defined by impression management scores.     

The good,the bad and the mad: Response bias in self-report measures

This study set out to examine the susceptibility of five extensively used, self-report measures to response set bias. Subjects were requested either to fake good, (give a good impression), fake bad, (give a bad impression), fake mad, (give an impression of mental instability) or respond honestly. Subjects who faked good had significantly higher Extraversion, Lie and Social Desirability scores but lowest Neuroticism, Psychoticism and Social Anxiety scores. Subjects who faked bad had significantly lower Extraversion and higher Psychoticism and Social Anxiety scores. Fake mad subjects scored higher on Self-Monitoring and Locus of Control. Four of the eight scales showed significant differences between subjects faking bad and those faking mad. The results are discussed in terms of questionnaire design and respondent's motivation.     

Exaggeration is harder than understatement, but practice makes perfect!

Previous research on the fakeability of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) yielded inconsistent results. The present study simultaneously analyses several relevant factors: faking direction, type of instructions, and practice. Furthermore, it takes baseline individual differences into account. After a baseline assessment in a self-esteem IAT without faking instructions (t0), participants in the faking conditions then (t1) faked high or low scores without being provided with recommended strategies on how to do so (i.e., individual strategies). At t2 and t3, they were asked to fake the IAT after having received information on recommended faking strategies. At t4, faking direction was reversed. Without the recommended strategies, faking high scores was not possible, but faking low scores was. With the recommended strategies, participants needed additional practice to fake high scores. When faking directions were reversed, participants were successful without additional practice, suggesting a transfer in faking skills. In most of the faking attempts, faking success was moderated by individual differences in baseline implicit self-esteem. This suggests that the complex interplay of factors influencing faking success should be taken into account when considering the issue of fakeability of the IAT.     

The impact of modified instructions on ego-level scores: a psychometric hazard or indication of optimal ego level?

Various modified instructions have different effects on the Washington University Sentence Completion Test for Ego Development (Loevinger, 1985). These effects were reviewed and 2 alternative explanations were explored: The "measurement unreliability explanation" versus the "optimal level explanation." Both explanations were systematically studied in 2 test-retest experiments with the Sentence Completion Test for Children and Youths (Westenberg, Treffers, & Drewes, 1998). The modified instructions were to make a favorable impression on the tester ("fake good" condition) or to complete the sentences in as adult and mature a manner as one can ("be mature" condition). Both experiments were conducted with 9- to 15-year-old children and adolescents (N = 127, 128). As was anticipated, neither the fake good nor the be mature condition yielded higher (or lower) reliability indexes as compared to the standard instructions, hence discounting the measurement unreliability explanation. Also as expected, the fake good condition did not yield significantly higher ego-level scores, whereas the be mature condition did yield significantly higher ego-level scores. The former instructions did not convey information relevant to the construct or measure of ego development, whereas the latter instructions did convey information relevant for raising ego-level scores. It is argued that the higher scores under the be mature instructions might reflect the respondents' "optimal" ego level (best functioning), whereas the ego-level score under the standard instructions might reflect their "functional" level (normal functioning).     

The influence of item order on intentional response distortion in the assessment of high potentials: Assessing pilot applicants

An experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of item order and questionnaire content on faking good or intentional response distortion. It was hypothesized that intentional response distortion would either increase towards the end of a long questionnaire, as learning effects might make it easier to adjust responses to a faking good schema, or decrease because applicants' will to distort responses is reduced if the questionnaire lasts long enough. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that certain types of questionnaire content are especially vulnerable to response distortion. Eighty‐four pre‐selected pilot applicants filled out a questionnaire consisting of 516 items including items from the NEO five factor inventory (NEO FFI), NEO personality inventory revised (NEO PI‐R) and business‐focused inventory of personality (BIP). The positions of the items were varied within the applicant sample to test if responses are affected by item order, and applicants' response behaviour was additionally compared to that of volunteers. Applicants reported significantly higher mean scores than volunteers, and results provide some evidence of decreased faking tendencies towards the end of the questionnaire. Furthermore, it could be demonstrated that lower variances or standard deviations in combination with appropriate (often higher) mean scores can serve as an indicator for faking tendencies in group comparisons, even if effects are not significant.     

TELL ME SOME MORE: EXPLORING HOW VERBAL ABILITY AND ITEM VERIFIABILITY INFLUENCE RESPONSES TO BIODATA QUESTIONS IN A HIGH‐STAKES SELECTION CONTEXT

Although self‐rated or self‐scored selection measures are commonly used in selection contexts, they are potentially susceptible to applicant response distortion or faking. The response elaboration technique (RET), which requires job applicants to provide supporting information to justify their responses, has been identified as a potential way to minimize applicant response distortion. In a large‐scale, high‐stakes selection context (N= 16,304), we investigate the extent to which RET affects responding on a biodata test as well as the underlying reasons for any potential effect. We find that asking job applicants to elaborate their responses leads to overall lower scores on a biodata test. Item verifiability affects the extent to which RET decreases faking, which we suggest is due to increased accountability. In addition, verbal ability was more strongly related to biodata item scores when items require elaboration, although the effect of verbal ability was small. The implications of these findings for reducing faking in personnel selection are delineated.     

Intelligence and maturity: meta-analytic evidence for the incremental and discriminant validity of Loevinger's measure of ego development

This review examined whether Loevinger's measure of personality (ego) development is equivalent to the measurement of intelligence. The authors conducted a meta-analysis of 52 correlations between ego level scores and intelligence test scores (retrieved from 42 studies involving 5,648 participants). The weighted average correlation between ego level and intelligence ranged from.20 to.34, depending on the intellectual ability assessed (e.g., verbal intelligence). Adjusting for measurement unreliability increased these values only minimally. The authors also reviewed 16 studies that examined the association between ego level and various criterion variables (e.g., aggressive behavior) after statistically controlling for the effects of intelligence. Ninety-four percent of the tests revealed significant relations between ego level and criterion variables after controlling for intelligence, indicating that ego development and intelligence are not interchangeable constructs. These findings do not support recent speculations concerning the limited value of stage models of maturity, social development, and moral reasoning.     

Toward an Integrated Model of Applicant Faking Behavior1

The present research tested a model that integrated the theory of planned behavior (TPB) with a model of faking presented by McFarland and Ryan (2000) to predict faking on a personality test. In Study 1, the TPB explained sizable variance in the intention to fake. In Study 2, the TPB explained both the intention to fake and actual faking behavior. Different faking measures (i.e., difference scores and social desirability scales) tended to yield similar conclusions, but the difference scores were more strongly related to the variables in the model. These results provide support for a model that may increase understanding of applicant faking behavior and suggest reasons for the discrepancies in past research regarding the prevalence and consequences of faking.     

Examining Faking on Personality Inventories Using Unfolding Item Response Theory Models

A concern about personality inventories in diagnostic and decision-making contexts is that individuals will fake. Although there is extensive research on faking, little research has focused on how perceptions of personality items change when individuals are faking or responding honestly. This research demonstrates how the delta parameter from the generalized graded unfolding item response theory model can be used to examine how individuals’ perceptions about personality items might change when responding honestly or when faking. The results indicate that perceptions changed from honest to faking conditions for several neuroticism items. The direction of the change varied, indicating that faking can operate to increase or decrease scores within a personality factor.     

Effects of response sets on NEO-PI-R scores and their relations to external criteria

Validity scales indicate the extent to which the results of a self-report inventory are a valid indicator of the test taker's psychological functioning. Validity scales generally are designed to detect the common response sets of positive impression management (underreporting, or faking good), negative impression management (overreporting, or faking bad), and random responding. The revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992b) is a popular personality assessment tool based on the 5-factor model of personality and is used in a variety of settings. The NEO-PI-R does not include objective validity scales to screen for positive or negative impression management. The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of recently proposed validity scales for detecting these response sets on the NEO-PI-R (Schinka, Kinder, & Kremer, 1997) and to examine the effects of positive and negative impression management on correlations between the NEO-PI-R and external criteria (the Interpersonal Adjective Scale-Revised-B5 [Wiggins & Trapnell, 1997] and the NEO-PI-R Form R). The validity scales discriminated with reasonable accuracy between standard responding and the 2 response sets. Additionally, most correlations between the NEO-PI-R and external criteria were significantly lower when participants were dissimulating than when responding to standard instructions. It appears that response sets of positive and negative impression management may pose a significant threat to the external validity of the NEO-PI-R and that validity scales for their detection might be a useful addition to the inventory.     

The impact of “non-targeted traits” on personality test faking,hiring, and workplace deviance

Evidence suggests that job applicants often “fake” on pre-employment personality tests by attempting to portray an exceedingly desirable impression in order to improve the likelihood of being selected. In the current research we shed light on the personality characteristics of those individuals who seem most likely to engage in faking. We refer to these personality variables as non-targeted traits when they are not directly targeted by the organization’s pre-employment personality test. These traits, however, may have an influence on targeted scores used for employment decision making through their effect on faking. Findings suggest that individuals will be more likely to be hired if they are low on non-targeted traits including Honesty–Humility, Integrity, and Morality, and high on Risk Taking. Such individuals also reported higher levels of workplace deviance in their current jobs. Thus, it seems that individuals low on Honesty–Humility, Integrity, and Morality, and individuals high on Risk Taking, may be most likely to engage in personality test faking, be hired, and participate in workplace deviant behaviors if these traits are not directly targeted in selection.     

Reliability of a sentence completion measure of ego development.

Studied the reliability of the Washington University Sentence Completion Test by giving 51 9th graders and 26 college students the test twice, a week apart. For 9th graders the design included a test-retest group and two groups given half of the test at each session. Although test-retest correlations were high for the 9th graders, retest scores dropped significantly. With college students (a) test-retest correlations through positive and significant were lower, (b) retest scores did not change systematically, and (c) percentage agreement between test and retest scores was high. Discrepant results were related to motivational set and variance in test scores. Split-half correlations and internal consistency coefficients were high. Likelihood of lower retest scores makes problematic the use of this test for short term pretest-posttest studies seeking to stimulate ego development.     

Ego development and chronic illness in adolescents

To examine the effects of chronic illness on the psychological growth process known as ego development, scores were compared on the Loevinger Sentence Completion Test for 36 teens (16 boys, 20 girls) with chronic illness and 50 teens (16 boys, 34 girls) without chronic illness. Their ages ranged from 13 to 21 years, with a mean of 17.4 years. Most were Black (37%) or Hispanic (41%) and lived in poor or working-class neighborhoods. When age, sex, and Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) scores were controlled in multiple regression analyses, no direct association between ego development stage and presence of chronic illness, severity of illness, age at onset, or duration of illness was found. Analysis of the chronically ill group alone revealed a significant PPVT X Severity interaction, indicating that ego development in chronically ill teens is lower when illness is more severe and verbal IQ is higher.     

THE SUSCEPTIBILITY OF OVERT AND COVERT INTEGRITY TESTS TO COACHING AND FAKING

Abstract— Although previous research has indicated that faking can affect integrity test scores, the effects of coaching on integrity test scores have never been examined We conducted a between-subjects experiment to assess the effects of coaching and faking instructions on an overt and a covert integrity test Coaching provided simple rules to follow when answering test items and instructions on how to avoid elevated validity scale scores There were five instruction conditions "just take,""fake good,""coach overt,""coach covert," and coach both All subjects completed both overt and covert tests and a measure of intelligence Results provided strong evidence for the coachability of the overt integrity test, over and above the much smaller elevation in the faking condition The covert test apparently could be neither coached nor faked successfully Scores on both integrity tests tended to be positively correlated with intelligence in the coaching and faking conditions We discuss the generalizability of these results to other samples and other integrity tests, and the relevance of the coachability of integrity tests to the ongoing debate concerning the prediction of counterproductive behavior     

Personality correlates of a measure of honesty

It was hypothesized that screening applicants for theft proneness using the Reid Report might screen in more conservative, more rigid, and less creative candidates, in effect outweighing the benefits of the instrument. A sample of 179 applicants were administered the 16PF and the Reid Report. Sex, minority status, and type of position applied for were shown to be independent of performance on the Reid Report. Applicants passing the Reid Report were shown, at a statistically significant level, to have higher ego strength, to be less anxious, more apt to behave in socially desirable ways, less driven by id impulses, and less inhibited. Furthermore, applicants failing the Reid Report were shown to have total 16PF profiles which were statistically significantly closer (D²) to the 16PF profiles of five pathological groups than were those passing the Reid Report. Higher scores on the Reid Report were related to faking good on the 16PF. Since the relationship between 16PF faking good and the Reid Report may be indicative of real personality variance, distortion variance, or both follow-up research has been suggested.     

Detecting Fake-Good and Fake-Bad MMPI-2 Profiles

This study examined the extent to which the validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) could identify subjects who were faking bad or faking good and differentiate between psychiatric patients and normal subjects who were faking bad. Subjects were 106 undergraduate college students and 50 psychiatric patients. Results indicate that the mean profiles and optimal cutoff scores resembled those previously reported for the original MMPI. Accurate identification of persons who were faking bad or faking good was achieved. It was possible to differentiate between the psychiatric patients and normal persons who were faking bad, but different cutoff scores were needed to differentiate between normals taking the test under standard instructions and those instructed to fake bad. Optimal cutoff scores were suggested.     

Overclaiming as a measure of faking

Researchers have recently asserted that popular measures of response distortion (i.e., socially desirable responding scales) lack construct validity (i.e., measure traits rather than test faking) and that applicant faking on personality tests remains a serious concern ( [Griffith and Peterson, 2008] and [Holden, 2008]). Thus, although researchers and human resource (HR) selection specialists have been attempting to find measures which readily capture individual differences in faking that increase personality test validity, to date such attempts have rarely, if ever succeeded. The current study, however, finds that the overclaiming technique captures individual differences in faking and subsequently increases personality test score validity via suppressing unwanted error variance in personality test scores. Implications of this research on the overclaiming technique for improving HR selection decisions are illustrated and discussed.     

Status faking on the SVIB-M

A study and replication of students faking interest in high status occupations on the Strong Vocational Interest Blank for Men. In general, the faking was successful in shifting the specific target occupational scales and especially the occupational level scale. Other scales are affected, many with decisive upward or downward shifts. Demonstration is made of the extent to which the faking condition led to differences in the overall test results. Various aspects of the general problem of test faking are reviewed.     

How do you fake a personality test? An investigation of cognitive models of impression-managed responding

Because faking poses a threat to the validity of personality measures, research has focused on ways of detecting faking, including the use of response times. However, the applicability and validity of these approaches are dependent upon the actual cognitive process underlying faking. This study tested three competing cognitive models in order to identify the process underlying faking and to determine whether response time patterns are a viable method of detecting faking. Specifically, we used a within-subjects manipulation of instructions (respond honestly, make a good impression, make a specific impression) to examine whether the distribution of response times across response scale options (e.g., disagree, agree) could be used to identify faking on the NEO PI-R. Our results suggest that individuals reference a schema of an ideal respondent when faking. As a result, response time patterns such as the well-known inverted-U cannot be used to identify faking.     

Detecting fake-good and fake-bad MMPI-2 profiles

This study examined the extent to which the validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) could identify subjects who were faking bad or faking good and differentiate between psychiatric patients and normal subjects who were faking bad. Subjects were 106 undergraduate college students and 50 psychiatric patients. Results indicate that the mean profiles and optimal cutoff scores resembled those previously reported for the original MMPI. Accurate identification of persons who were faking bad or faking good was achieved. It was possible to differentiate between the psychiatric patients and normal persons who were faking bad, but different cutoff scores were needed to differentiate between normals taking the test under standard instructions and those instructed to fake bad. Optimal cutoff scores were suggested.