The Impact of Applicant Faking on Selection Measures,Hiring Decisions,and Employee Performance

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence of applicant faking and its impact on the psychometric properties of the selection measure, the quality of hiring decisions, and employee performance.

Design/Methodology/Approach

This study utilized a within-subjects design where responses on a self-report measure were obtained for 162 individuals both when they applied for a pharmaceutical sales position, and after they were hired. Training performance data was collected at the completion of sales training and sales data was collected 5 months later.

Findings

Applicant faking was a common occurrence, with approximately half of the individuals being classified as a faker on at least one of the dimensions contained in the self-report measure. In addition, faking was found to negatively impact the psychometric properties of the selection measure, as well as the quality of potential hiring decisions made by the organization. Further, fakers exhibited lower levels of performance than non-fakers.

Implications

These findings indicate that past conclusions that applicant faking is either uncommon or does not negatively impact the selection system and/or organizational performance may be unwarranted.

Originality/Value

Remarkably few studies have examined applicant faking using a within-subjects design using actual job applicants, which has limited our understanding of applicant faking. Even fewer studies have attempted to link faking to criterion data to evaluate the impact of faking on employee performance. By utilizing this design and setting, the present study provides a unique glimpse into both the prevalence of faking and the significant impact faking can have on organizations.     

Reduction of faking with the use of a forced-choice personality test: Cross-cultural comparisons between South Korea and the United States

Forced-choice format tests have been suggested as an alternative to Likert-scale measures for personnel selection due to robustness to faking and response styles. This study compared degrees of faking occurring in Likert-scale and forced-choice five-factor personality tests between South Korea and the United States. Also, it was examined whether the forced-choice format was effective at reducing faking in both countries. Data were collected from 396 incumbents participating in both honest and applicant conditions (N_SK = 179, N_US = 217). Cohen's d values for within-subjects designs (ds_within) for between the two conditions were utilized to measure magnitudes of faking occurring in each format and country. In both countries, the degrees of faking occurring in the Likert-scale were larger than those from the forced-choice format, and the magnitudes of faking across five personality traits were larger in South Korea by from 0.07 to 0.12 in ds_within. The forced-choice format appeared to successfully reduce faking for both countries as the average ds_within decreased by 0.06 in both countries. However, the patterns of faking occurring in the forced-choice format varied between the two countries. In South Korea, degrees of faking in Openness and Conscientiousness increased, whereas those in Extraversion and Agreeableness were substantially decreased. Potential factors leading to trait-specific faking under the forced-choice format were discussed in relation to cultural influence on the perception of personality traits and score estimation in Thurstonian item response theory (IRT) models. Finally, the adverse impact of using forced-choice formats on multicultural selection settings was elaborated.     

Beyond Impression Management: Evaluating three measures of response distortion and their relationship to job performance

Three measures of response distortion (i.e., social desirability, covariance index, and implausible answers) were examined in both applicant and incumbent samples. Performance data, including supervisor ratings of task and contextual performance as well as objective performance criteria such as tardiness, work‐related accidents, and a customized work simulation, were obtained for the incumbent sample. Results provided further support for the existence of applicant faking behavior and shed light into the relationship between faking and job performance, largely depending on how one defines and measures faking as well as the performance criteria evaluated. Implications for future research and practice in personality assessment for selection purposes were discussed.     

Substance versus style: a new look at social desirability in motivating contexts

Although there is an emerging consensus that social desirability does not meaningfully affect criterion-related validity, several researchers have reaffirmed the argument that social desirability degrades the construct validity of personality measures. Yet, most research demonstrating the adverse consequences of faking for construct validity uses a fake-good instruction set. The consequence of such a manipulation is to exacerbate the effects of response distortion beyond what would be expected under realistic circumstances (e.g., an applicant setting). The research reported in this article was designed to assess these issues by using real-world contexts not influenced by artificial instructions. Results suggest that response distortion has little impact on the construct validity of personality measures used in selection contexts.     

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.     

When Winning is Everything: The Relationship between Competitive Worldviews and Job Applicant Faking

Job applicant faking, that is, consciously misrepresenting information during the selection process, is ubiquitous and is a threat to the usefulness of various selection tools. Understanding antecedents of faking is thus of utmost importance. Recent theories of faking highlight the central role of various forms of competition for understanding why faking occurs. Drawing on these theories, we suggest that the more applicants adhere to competitive worldviews (CWs), that is, the more they believe that the social world is a competitive, Darwinian‐type of struggle over scarce resources, the more likely they are to fake in employment interviews. We tested our hypothesis in three independent studies that were conducted in five different countries. Results show that CWs are strongly associated with faking, independently of job applicants’ cultural and economic context. More specifically, applicants’ CWs explain faking intentions and self‐reported past faking above and beyond the Dark Triad of personality (Study 1), competitiveness and the six facets of conscientiousness (Study 2). Also, when faking is measured using a response randomisation technique to control for social desirability, faking is more prevalent among applicants with strong vs. less strong CWs (Study 3). Taken together, this research demonstrates that competition is indeed strongly associated with undesirable applicant behaviors.     

Comparing Personality Test Formats and Warnings: Effects on criterion‐related validity and test‐taker reactions

The potential for applicant response distortion on personality measures remains a major concern in high‐stakes testing situations. Many approaches to understanding response distortion are too transparent (e.g., instructed faking studies) – or are too subtle (e.g., correlations with social desirability measures as indices of faking). Recent research reveals more promising approaches in two methods: using forced‐choice (FC) personality test items and warning against faking. The present study examined effects of these two methods on criterion‐related validity and test‐taker reactions. Results supported incremental validity for an FC and Likert‐scale measure in warning and no‐warning conditions, above and beyond cognitive ability. No clear differences emerged between the FC vs Likert measures or warning vs no‐warning conditions in terms of validity. However, some evidence suggested that FC measures and warnings may produce negative test‐taker reactions. We conclude with implications for implementation in selection settings.     

Personality,interview faking,and the mediating role of attitudes,norms, and perceived behavioral control

This study investigated the psychological processes underlying interview faking, and that link personality to interview faking. In a sample of 198 recent interviewees, surveyed across three time points, we examined the mediating role of three constructs from the theory of planned behavior (TPB; i.e., attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control) in explaining the relationship between the traits of Honesty–Humility and Conscientiousness and one form of interview faking (i.e., extensive image creation). Results indicated that all three TPB constructs correlated with interview faking, although only attitudes and subjective norms predicted faking incrementally. Attitudes and norms mediated the relationships between Honesty–Humility and Conscientiousness and interview faking. This study provides insight into interview faking, and the link between personality and interview faking.     

Faking and the validity of conscientiousness: a Monte Carlo investigation

The article reports the findings from a Monte Carlo investigation examining the impact of faking on the criterion-related validity of Conscientiousness for predicting supervisory ratings of job performance. Based on a review of faking literature, 6 parameters were manipulated in order to model 4,500 distinct faking conditions (5 [magnitude] x 5 [proportion] x 4 [variability] x 3 [faking-Conscientiousness relationship] x 3 [faking-performance relationship] x 5 [selection ratio]). Overall, the results indicated that validity change is significantly affected by all 6 faking parameters, with the relationship between faking and performance, the proportion of fakers in the sample, and the magnitude of faking having the strongest effect on validity change. Additionally, the association between several of the parameters and changes in criterion-related validity was conditional on the faking-performance relationship. The results are discussed in terms of their practical and theoretical implications for using personality testing for employee selection.     

The Effects of Social Desirability and Faking on Personality and Integrity Assessment for Personnel Selection

A review of the extant literature and new empirical research suggests that social desirability is not much of a concern in personality and integrity testing for personnel selection. In particular, based on meta-analytically derived evidence, it appears that social desirability influences do not destroy the convergent and discriminant validity of the Big Five dimensions of personality (Emotional Stability, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness). We also present new empirical evidence regarding gender and age differences in socially desirable re- sponding. Although social desirability predicts a number of important work variables such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and supervisor ratings of training success, social desirability does not seem to be a predictor of overall job performance and is only very weakly related to specific dimensions of job performance such as technical proficiency (r = -.07) and personal discipline ( r = .05). Large sample investigations of the moderating influences of social desirability in actual work settings indicate that social desirability does not moderate the criterion-related validities of personality variables or integrity tests. The criterion-related validity of integrity tests for overall job performance with applicant samples in predictive studies is .41. Controlling for social desirability in integrity or personality test scores leaves the operational validities intact, thereby suggesting that social desirability functions neither as a mediator nor as a suppressor variable in personality-performance.     

Personality measurement, faking, and employment selection

Real job applicants completed a 5-factor model personality measure as part of the job application process. They were rejected; 6 months later they (n = 5,266) reapplied for the same job and completed the same personality measure. Results indicated that 5.2% or fewer improved their scores on any scale on the 2nd occasion; moreover, scale scores were as likely to change in the negative direction as the positive. Only 3 applicants changed scores on all 5 scales beyond a 95% confidence threshold. Construct validity of the personality scales remained intact across the 2 administrations, and the same structural model provided an acceptable fit to the scale score matrix on both occasions. For the small number of applicants whose scores changed beyond the standard error of measurement, the authors found the changes were systematic and predictable using measures of social skill, social desirability, and integrity. Results suggest that faking on personality measures is not a significant problem in real-world selection settings.     

Item placement on a personality measure: effects on faking behavior and test measurement properties

Although personality tests are widely used to select applicants for a variety of jobs, there is concern that such measures are fakable. One procedure used to minimize faking has been to disguise the true intent of personality tests by randomizing items such that items measuring similar constructs are dispersed throughout the test. In this study, we examined if item placement does influence the fakability and psychometric properties of a personality measure. Study participants responded to 1 of 2 formats (random vs. grouped items) of a personality test honestly and also under instructions to fake or to behave like an applicant. Results indicate that the grouped item placement format was more fakable for the Neuroticism and Conscientiousness scales. The test with items randomly placed fit the data better within the honest and applicant conditions. These findings demonstrate that the issue of item placement should be seriously considered before administering personality measures because different item presentations may affect the incidence of faking and the psychometric properties of the measure.     

Warning Against Faking on a Personality Test: Effects on Applicant Reactions and Personality Test Scores

To reduce faking on personality tests, applicants may be warned that a social desirability scale is embedded in the test. Although this procedure has been shown to substantially reduce faking, there is no data that addresses how such a warning may influence applicant reactions toward the selection procedure or the relationships among personality constructs. Using an organizational justice framework, this study examines the effect of warning on procedural justice perceptions. Additionally, the extent to which warning changes the relationships among personality variables, socially desirable responding, and organizational justice variables, was explored. The results suggest that warning did not negatively affect test‐taker reactions. However, the relationships among the justice measures and the personality variables and socially desirable responding differed across the warned and unwarned groups. The organizational justice model fit best and there was less multicollinearity among the personality variables in the warned condition, compared to the unwarned condition. Thus, providing a warning appears to have positive consequences when using personality measures.     

PERSONALITY TESTS AT THE CROSSROADS: A RESPONSE TO MORGESON, CAMPION, DIPBOYE, HOLLENBECK, MURPHY, AND SCHMITT (2007)

Despite widespread and growing acceptance that published personality tests are valid predictors of job performance, Morgeson et al. (2007) propose they be abandoned in personnel selection because average validity estimates are low. Our review of the literature shows that Morgeson et al.'s skepticism is unfounded. Meta-analyses have demonstrated that published personality tests, in fact, yield useful validity estimates when validation is based on confirmatory research using job analysis and taking into account the bidirectionality of trait–performance linkages. Further gains are likely by use of narrow over broad measures, multivariate prediction, and theory attuned to the complexities of trait expression and evaluation at work. Morgeson et al. also suggest that faking has little, if any, impact on personality test validity and that it may even contribute positively to job performance. Job applicant research suggests that faking under true hiring conditions attenuates personality test validity but that validity is still sufficiently strong to warrant personality test use in hiring. Contrary to Morgeson et al., we argue that the full value of published personality tests in organizations has yet to be realized, calling for programmatic theory-driven research.     

Using Blatant Extreme Responding for Detecting Faking in High‐stakes Selection: Construct validity,relationship with general mental ability,and subgroup differences

Although there has been a steady growth in research and use of self‐report measures of personality in the last 20 years, faking in personality testing remains as a major concern. Blatant extreme responding (BER), which includes endorsing desirable extreme responses (i.e., 1 and 5 s), has recently been identified as a potential faking detection technique. In a large‐scale (N = 358,033), high‐stakes selection context, we investigate the construct validity of BER, the extent to which BER relates to general mental ability, and the extent to which BER differs across jobs, gender, and ethnic groups. We find that BER reflects applicant faking by showing that BER relates to a more established measure of faking, an unlikely virtue (UV) scale, and that applicants score higher than incumbents on BER. BER is (slightly) positively related to general mental ability whereas UV is negatively related to it. Applicants for managerial positions score slightly higher on BER than applicants for nonmanagerial positions. In addition, there was no gender or racial differences on BER. The implications of these findings for detecting faking in personnel selection are delineated.     

内隐联想测验“内隐性”的可控性研究

在许多社会科学研究中,社会称许性会对研究的效度产生不良影响。研究者希望能得到被试的真实态度和反应,从而极力避免这种社会称许性偏见。内隐测量工具的一个主要目的是让研究者能够获得未加任何粉饰的态度测量结果从而消除和避免自我表现和社会称许性。本文通过四个实验考察了内隐联想测验的可掩饰性、掩饰的持久性、掩饰的条件化和IAT经验的迁移性,结果显示：（1）被试可以通过一定的反应策略来掩饰其真实的内隐态度,从而使所测得的个体内隐态度和群体内隐态度失真,典型的反应策略是均衡相容和不相容任务的反应速度;（2）内隐联想测验的可掩饰性需以先前的IAT经验为基础,且IAT经验无需属于相同的测验范畴,对IAT原理的掌握将有助于被试成功地实施掩饰;（3）内隐联想测验的可掩饰性具有一定的时效性,先前的IAT经验越久远,则成功掩饰的可能性越低;总之,内隐联想测验并不能彻底避免社会称许性。     

应聘情境下作假识别量表的开发

在应聘情境中, 被试容易对人格测验作假。应对作假的常用方法是采用社会称许性量表对作假直接测量, 再去校正和识别作假效应。但是采用社会称许性量表测量作假存在很多问题, 因而基于作假的特殊性质开发了《作假识别量表》。采用探索性因素分析证实了量表的单维性, 解释率为54.650%。概化理论检验表明测验信度较好, G系数为0.906, j系数为0.902。采用一个真实的应聘情境检验效度, 发现《作假识别量表》对作假更加敏感, 能够比较充分地测量作假。     

What if we fake emotional intelligence? A test of criterion validity attenuation

We evaluate the extent to which established self-report measures of emotional intelligence (EI) are susceptible to socially desirable responding. A study was conducted to assess the relationship between EI and multiple outcomes across 3 experimental faking conditions. Using structural equation modeling, we found that the criterion validities of self-report EI measures in the prediction of life satisfaction, psychological distress, rational coping, and detachment coping are not attenuated in moderate social desirability settings, but are somewhat attenuated when faking is maximized. Moreover, partialing out social desirability does not yield any improvement of the predictive validity of self-report EI.     

Correction for faking in self‐report personality tests

Faking is a common problem in testing with self‐report personality tests, especially in high‐stakes situations. A possible way to correct for it is statistical control on the basis of social desirability scales. Two such scales were developed and applied in the present paper. It was stressed that the statistical models of faking need to be adapted to different properties of the personality scales, since such scales correlate with faking to different extents. In four empirical studies of self‐report personality tests, correction for faking was investigated. One of the studies was experimental, and asked participants to fake or to be honest. In the other studies, job or school applicants were investigated. It was found that the approach to correct for effects of faking in self‐report personality tests advocated in the paper removed a large share of the effects, about 90%. It was found in one study that faking varied as a function of degree of how important the consequences of test results could be expected to be, more high‐stakes situations being associated with more faking. The latter finding is incompatible with the claim that social desirability scales measure a general personality trait. It is concluded that faking can be measured and that correction for faking, based on such measures, can be expected to remove about 90% of its effects.     

BEYOND THE MEAN BIAS: THE EFFECT OF WARNING AGAINST FAKING ON BIODATA ITEM VARIANCES

We studied the effects of faking biodata test items by randomly warning 214 of 429 applicants for a nurse's assistant position against faking. While the warning mitigated the propensity to fake, the specific warning effects depended on item transparency. For transparent items, warning reduced the extremeness of item means and increased item variances. For nontransparent items, warning did not have an effect on item means and reduced item variances. These faking effects were best predicted when transparency was operationalized in terms of item-specific job desirability in addition to the item-general social desirability. We also demonstrated a psychometric principle: The effect of warning on means at the item level is preserved in scales constructed from those items, but the effect on variances at the item level is masked at the scale level. These results raise new questions regarding the attenuating effects of faking on validity, and regarding the benefit of warning applicants against faking.