Shall we continue or stop disapproving of self-presentation? Evidence on impression management and faking in a selection context and their relation to job performance

The self-presentation tactics of candidates during job interviews and on personality inventories have been a focal topic in selection research. The current study investigated self-presentation across these two selection devices. Specifically, we examined whether candidates who use impression management (IM) tactics during an interview show more faking on a personality inventory and whether the relation to job performance is similar for both forms of self-presentation. Data were collected in a simulated selection process with an interview under applicant conditions and a personality inventory that was administered under applicant conditions and thereafter for research purposes. Because all participants were employed, we were also able to collect job performance ratings from their supervisors. Candidates who used IM in the interview also showed more faking in a personality inventory. Importantly, faking was positively related to supervisors’ job performance ratings, but IM was unrelated. Hence, this study gives rise to arguments for a more balanced view of self-presentation.     

Measuring faking in the employment interview: development and validation of an interview faking behavior scale

An Interview Faking Behavior (IFB) scale is developed and validated in 6 studies (N = 1,346). In Study 1, a taxonomy of faking behavior is delineated. The factor structure of a measure is evaluated and refined (Studies 2 and 3). The convergent and discriminant validity of the measure is examined (Study 4). The IFB scale consists of 4 factors (Slight Image Creation, Extensive Image Creation, Image Protection, and Ingratiation) and 11 subfactors (Embellishing, Tailoring, Fit Enhancing, Constructing, Inventing, Borrowing, Masking, Distancing, Omitting, Conforming, and Interviewer Enhancing). A study of actual interviews shows that scores on the IFB scale are related to getting a 2nd interview or a job offer (Study 5). In Study 6, an experiment is conducted to test the usefulness of the new measure for studying methods of reducing faking using structured interviews. It is found that past behavior questions are more resistant to faking than situational questions, and follow-up questioning increases faking. Finally, over 90% of undergraduate job candidates fake during employment interviews; however, fewer candidates engage in faking that is semantically closer to lying, ranging from 28% to 75%.     

Prepared to fake? The relationship between applicants’ job interview preparation and faking

Multiple frameworks and models postulate an effect of job interview preparation on faking. Two studies were conducted to examine if applicants’ interview preparation is correlated with higher faking. Besides analyzing the general extent of preparation, we also distinguished between different preparation categories. In Study 1 (N = 237), a presented preparation video led to higher intentions on image protection but did not increase overall faking intentions. Study 2 (N = 206) focused on past preparation and impression management (IM). The total time spent on preparation was positively correlated with faking. Applicants’ preparation via online videos and professional interview preparation was correlated with higher deceptive and honest IM. Preparation via online videos was additionally correlated with a higher perceived interview difficulty.     

A review of applicant faking in selection interviews

Interviews are commonly used for selection but research on interview faking only gained momentum relatively recently. We review both theoretical and empirical work on prevalence, antecedents, processes, and effects of interview faking. Most applicants fake at least to some degree. Personality (e.g., Conscientiousness, Honesty‐humility, the Dark Triad) and attitudes toward faking substantially correlate with faking behaviors. Research concerning applicants' ability, interview structure components, or contextual factors is limited. Furthermore, the impact of faking on interview ratings is mixed and effects on criterion‐related validity are not consistently negative. Finally, the detection of faking seems hardly possible and there are limited options available to reduce interview faking. Throughout our review, we describe important gaps and derive suggestions and propositions for future research.     

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.     

Factors Affecting Potential Personality Retest Improvement After Initial Failure

Attention in the personality test faking literature has been directed toward research designs in which job applicants complete a personality test, fail to get the job, and subsequently retest. This article highlights the extent to which inferences drawn from studies using the retest-after-failure research design address the extent and prevalence of applicant faking. Results from several studies using this design are reviewed, revealing an enormous range of findings. We simulate two aspects of the assessment context that can explain the discrepancy in previous results. The simulation systematically varies the weight given to personality in the assessment battery and the selection ratio to investigate their effects on personality retest scores. Results are useful for interpreting previous findings and understanding settings in which retest improvement occurs.     

Thou Shalt not Lie! Exploring and testing countermeasures against faking intentions and faking in selection interviews

Many applicants use faking in interviews to present themselves more favorably than they really are. There is widespread concern that this may affect interview validity. As previous research on countermeasures is sparse, we conducted an exploratory study to identify the most promising countermeasures. For technology-mediated interviews, these were warnings referring to a criterion-based content analysis and lie detection algorithms focusing on nonverbal or paraverbal cues. For face-to-face interviews, these were objective questions and a personable interviewer. We then investigated the effects of these countermeasures on faking intentions in two experimental vignette studies and on faking in another simulated interview study. However, none of the countermeasures could reduce faking intentions or faking. Additionally, in the vignette studies, warnings impaired applicant reactions.     

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.     

Economic Predictors of Differences in Interview Faking Between Countries: Economic Inequality Matters,Not the State of Economy

Many companies recruit employees from different parts of the globe, and faking behavior by potential employees is a ubiquitous phenomenon. It seems that applicants from some countries are more prone to faking compared to others, but the reasons for these differences are largely unexplored. This study relates country-level economic variables to faking behavior in hiring processes. In a cross-national study across 20 countries, participants (N = 3,839) reported their faking behavior in their last job interview. This study used the random response technique (RRT) to ensure participants’ anonymity and to foster honest answers regarding faking behavior. Results indicate that general economic indicators (gross domestic product per capita [GDP] and unemployment rate) show negligible correlations with faking across the countries, whereas economic inequality is positively related to the extent of applicant faking to a substantial extent. These findings imply that people are sensitive to inequality within countries and that inequality relates to faking, because inequality might actuate other psychological processes (e.g., envy) which in turn increase the probability for unethical behavior in many forms.     

Hiring bias and the disabled interviewee: Effects of manipulating work history and disability information of the disabled job applicant

Ninety MBA students were randomly assigned to one of six experimental conditions in a 3(levels of disability) × 2(levels of employment history) design. Levels of disability (Physical, Psychiatric, and No Disability) and levels of employment history (Good and Poor) were manipulated by giving the subjects bogus information on a job application form prior to hearing a taped job interview. Subjects then rated the quality of the interview and stated the probability that they would hire the interviewee. Evaluations of the interview and hiring probabilities were different between the experimental groups. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.     

An Empirical Review of the Employment Interview Construct Literature

The purpose of this paper is to summarize available empirical research on the association between employment interview ratings and various construct measures using a theoretical model developed as part of the study. The model posits 3 main sources of construct‐related variance in interview ratings: job‐related interview content (e.g., job knowledge), interviewee performance (e.g., impression management tactics), and personal/demographic characteristics (e.g., candidate attractiveness). Results suggest some potentially important findings, including that the mean correlation with interview ratings is twice as large for constructs related to interviewee performance as it is for constructs pertaining to job‐related interview content. Directions for future construct research are also identified. For instance, despite being central to the interpersonal make‐up of the candidates, research regarding the influence of interests, goals, and values on interview ratings is almost nonexistent.     

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.     

Must "service with a smile" be stressful? The moderating role of personal control for American and French employees

Suppressing and faking emotional expressions depletes personal resources and predicts job strain for customer-contact employees. The authors argue that personal control over behavior, in the job and within the national culture, provides compensatory resources that reduce this strain. With a survey study of 196 employees from the United States and France, the authors supported that high job autonomy buffered the relationship of emotion regulation with emotional exhaustion and, to a lesser extent, job dissatisfaction. The relationship of emotion regulation with job dissatisfaction also depended on the emotional culture; the relationship was weaker for French customer-contact employees who were proposed to have more personal control over expressions than U.S. employees. Theoretical and research implications for the emotion regulation literature and practical suggestions for minimizing job strain are proposed.     

The Employment Interview Context: Social and Situational Influences on Interviewer Decisions1

The employment interview context is broad and multifaceted, and it includes a number of social, situational, and affective influences which generate from the interviewee, interviewer, nature of the job in question, and interactions among these factors. The employment interview is proposed to be influenced by nonverbal and self-promotion behaviors of the applicant, interviewer training, and the requirements of the job. These variables then influence the intermediate variables of applicant similarity to the interviewer, perceived competence of the applicant, and interviewer affect toward the applicant. The intermediate variables then influence the perceived job suitability of the applicant. The present study tested and found support for modeling the employment interview context and how it affects interviewer decisions. The contributions and limitations of the present study are discussed, in addition to directions for future research.     

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.     

Faking under a nonlinear relationship between personality assessment scores and job performance

This study investigated whether faking in personality assessments affects the prediction of job performance and consequences of selection decisions when a nonlinear relationship was assumed between personality scores and job performance. It was also examined whether a selection strategy suggested for nonlinear relationships reduces the adverse impact of faking on consequences of selection decisions. The findings from the item response theory‐based simulations indicated that the prediction of job performance was affected by faking, whereas selection accuracy was not substantially affected by faking. The improvement in selection accuracy due to the strategy suggested for a nonlinear relationship was not noticeable. However, the suggested strategy reduced adverse impacts of faking on the estimation of selected applicants' performance scores.     

They Don't Do It Often,But They Do It Well: Exploring the relationship between applicant mental abilities and faking

Despite its scientific and practical importance, relatively few studies have been conducted to investigate the relationship between job applicant mental abilities and faking. Some studies suggest that more intelligent people fake less because they do not have to. Other studies suggest that more intelligent people fake more because they have increased capacity to fake. Based on a model of faking likelihood, we predicted that job candidates with a high level of mental abilities would be less likely to fake a biodata measure. However, for candidates who did exhibit faking on the biodata measure, we expected there would be a strong positive relationship between mental abilities and faking, because mental abilities increase their capacity to fake. We found considerable support for hypotheses on a large sample of job candidates (N=17,368), using the bogus item technique to detect faking.     

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.     

Faking resistance of a quasi-ipsative RIASEC occupational interest measure

Quasi-ipsative (QI) forced-choice response formats are often recommended over single-stimulus (SS) as a method to reduce applicant faking. Across three studies we developed and tested a QI version of the RIASEC occupational interests scale. The first study established acceptable reliability and validity of the QI version. The second and third studies tested the efficacy of the QI version for faking prevention in simulated job applicant scenarios. The results revealed that although the QI and SS formats were similarly fakable for the primary targeted interest, faking was limited for the secondary target on the QI version. Future research should identify the specific contexts in which QI prevents faking on various individual differences measures to allow for accurate recommendations in applied settings.     

Getting the Job: Attributional Retraining and the Employment Interview1

This study examined the effectiveness of attributional retraining (AR) in an employment interview setting. Our sample consisted of 50 co‐operative education students completing job interviews who were randomly assigned to a control or writing‐based AR condition. Dependent measures included attributions, expectations, and affect, as well as behavior with respect to an interview skills workshop, and actual employment outcomes. Results showed AR to promote controllable failure attributions, expectations, motivated behavior, and interview success, particularly among participants with maladaptive baseline attributions. Findings further revealed AR effects on emotions mediated by post‐treatment attributions. Implications for attribution theory and research on AR in employment settings are discussed.