A revised measure of approval motivation and its relationship to social desirability

Existing measures of approval motivation attempt to assess this dimension of personality indirectly through evaluation of socially desirable response tendencies. The Martin-Larsen Approval Motivation (MLAM) Scale takes a more direct approach by focusing on individual differences in need for social approval. Since the original version of the MLAM scale is subject to acquiescence response bias, fully balanced and partially balanced scales were created to minimize this response style. Results indicated that the revised measures arc equivalent to the original version and that balancing affects the magnitude but not the pattern of correlates with other scales. Comparisons with the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability (MCSD) Scale revealed a divergent pattern of correlates with several measures of personality suggesting a basic difference between the MLAM and MCSD in their conceptualization of approval motivation.     

Associations Between Symptom Validity Test Failure and Scores on the MMPI–2–RF Validity and Substantive Scales

Existing measures of approval motivation attempt to assess this dimension of personality indirectly through evaluation of socially desirable response tendencies. The Martin-Larsen Approval Motivation (MLAM) Scale takes a more direct approach by focusing on individual differences in need for social approval. Since the original version of the MLAM scale is subject to acquiescence response bias, fully balanced and partially balanced scales were created to minimize this response style. Results indicated that the revised measures arc equivalent to the original version and that balancing affects the magnitude but not the pattern of correlates with other scales. Comparisons with the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability (MCSD) Scale revealed a divergent pattern of correlates with several measures of personality suggesting a basic difference between the MLAM and MCSD in their conceptualization of approval motivation.     

On Enhancing the Cross‐Cultural Comparability of Likert‐Scale Personality and Value Measures: A Comparison of Common Procedures

This study aims to evaluate a number of procedures that have been proposed to enhance cross‐cultural comparability of personality and value data. A priori procedures (anchoring vignettes and direct measures of response styles (i.e. acquiescence, extremity, midpoint responding, and social desirability), a posteriori procedures focusing on data transformations prior to analysis (ipsatization and item parcelling), and two data modelling procedures (treating data as continuous vs as ordered categories) were compared using data collected from university students in 16 countries. We found that (i) anchoring vignettes showed lack of invariance, so they were not bias‐free; (ii) anchoring vignettes showed higher internal consistencies than raw scores where all other correction procedures, notably ipsatization, showed lower internal consistencies; (iii) in measurement invariance testing, no procedure yielded scalar invariance; anchoring vignettes and item parcelling slightly improved comparability, response style correction did not affect it, and ipsatization resulted in lower comparability; (iv) treating Likert‐scale data as categorical resulted in higher levels of comparability; (v) factor scores of scales extracted from different procedures showed similar correlational patterning; and (vi) response style correction was the only procedure that suggested improvement in external validity of country‐level conscientiousness. We conclude that, although no procedure resolves all comparability issues, anchoring vignettes, parcelling, and treating data as ordered categories seem promising to alleviate incomparability. We advise caution in uncritically applying any of these procedures. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology     

Investigating the influence of social desirability on personality factor structure

This study provides a comprehensive investigation into whether social desirability alters the factor structure of personality measures. The study brought together 4 large data sets wherein different organizational samples responded to different personality measures. This facilitated conducting 4 separate yet parallel investigations. Within each data set, individuals identified through a social desirability scale as responding in an honest manner were grouped together, and individuals identified as responding in a highly socially desirable manner were grouped together. Using various analyses, the fit of higher order factor structure models was compared across the 2 groups. Results were the same for each data set. Social desirability had little influence on the higher order factor structures that characterized the relationships among the scales of the personality measures.     

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.     

Substance and style in socially desirable responding

The purpose of the present series of studies was to evaluate whether Paulhus's (1991) Self-Deceptive Enhancement (SDE) and Communion Management (CM) socially desirable responding (SDR) scales should be interpreted as response set measures, response style measures, or measures of substantive individual differences in personality. In Study 1 (N=57) and Study 2 (N=62), army officer trainees were tested as applicants to their program and retested as incumbents 3 years later. Although participants generally responded to the situation by showing higher SDR scores in the applicant conditions, they also showed considerable rank-order stability across time. In Study 3 (N=70), self-reports on both SDR scales were corroborated by spouse reports, and, furthermore, SDE scores correlated with spouse reports of low Neuroticism and high Extraversion. Our data are interpreted as suggesting that both the CM and SDE scales are, in some varying amounts, measures of response set, response style, and substantive individual differences in personality. Implications of our findings for personality assessment and personnel selection are discussed.     

Socially desirable responding and its elusive effects on the validity of personality assessments

Past studies of socially desirable self-reports on the items of personality measures have found inconsistent effects of the response bias on the measures' predictive validities, with some studies reporting small effects and other studies reporting large effects. Using Monte Carlo methods, we evaluated various models of socially desirable responding by systematically adding predetermined amounts of the bias to the simulated personality trait scores of hypothetical test respondents before computing test-criterion validity correlations. Our study generally supported previous findings that have reported relatively minor decrements in criterion prediction, even with personality scores that were massively infused with desirability bias. Furthermore, the response bias failed to reveal itself as a statistical moderator of test validity or as a suppressor of validity. Large differences between some respondents' obtained test scores and their true trait scores, however, meant that the personality measure's construct validity would be severely compromised and, more specifically, that estimates of those individuals' criterion performance would be grossly in error. Our discussion focuses on reasons for the discrepant results reported in the literature pertaining to the effect of socially desirable responding on criterion validity. More important, we explain why the lack of effects of desirability bias on the usual indicators of validity, moderation, and suppression should not be surprising.     

A putatively general factor of personality (GFP) is not so general: A demonstration with the NEO PI-R

Recent research suggests that a general factor of personality (GFP) represents the zenith of a hierarchy of personality structure. For a roommate sample of 602 students, we evaluate the presence and validity of a general factor of personality in a Big Five measure. Findings indicate that a first factor, similar to what has been putatively labeled a GFP, can be extracted from self-report and observer-report, that this self-report first factor has validity for predicting an alleged observer-report GFP, and that this validity is not attributable to socially desirable responding. However, despite the existence of a valid first factor, it is not a general factor of personality because it fails to summarize adequately the complete systematic variance in the structure of personality.     

An empirical investigation of the influence of social desirability on the factor structure of the Chinese 16PF

This study examined whether social desirability affects the factor structure of the Chinese 16PF. Participants were 4645 Chinese first-year undergraduate and graduate students who completed the Chinese 16PF as part of a mandatory psychological assessment. Based on students’ score on the Impression Management scale (Paulhus, 1998), two groups were formed: (a) the high socially desirable responding group, consisting of students whose IM scores fell within the upper 20% of the distribution, and (b) the low socially desirable responding group, consisting of students whose IM scores fell within the bottom 25% of the distribution. A series of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses indicated that the factor pattern and factor loadings of the Chinese 16PF were invariant across these two groups.     

Social desirability and self-reported driving behaviours: Should we be worried?

There is widespread use of self-report measures of driving behaviour in the traffic psychology literature, despite the frequent criticism that such measures are subject to social desirability bias. However, no research has yet investigated the more recently developed measures of driving anxiety and avoidance behaviour for socially desirable responding. Furthermore, relatively little research has investigated the issue of socially desirable responding on self-reported driver behaviour in general, and that which does exist has several shortcomings. The present study used a repeated measures design to assess the effect of social desirability on a measure of driving avoidance, the Driving and Riding Avoidance Scale (DRAS), and the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ). A sample of 228 undergraduate students completed the DRAS, DBQ and a measure of socially desirable responding in class, which constituted a public place, and then again 2 months later in the privacy of their homes. None of the DBQ items were significantly different across the two locations. However, two of the DRAS general avoidance items were higher in the public setting, perhaps demonstrating the effect of socially desirable responding on driving avoidance due to environmental or practical concern. Nevertheless, overall it appears as though the DRAS and DBQ are not particularly vulnerable to socially desirable responding, although further well-designed research on the effects of such bias on these and other self-report measures of driving behaviour should be undertaken.     

Social desirability in personality inventories: Symptoms,diagnosis and prescribed cure

An analysis of social desirability in personality assessment is presented. Starting with the symptoms, Study 1 showed that mean ratings of graded personality items are moderately to strongly linearly related to social desirability (Self Deception, Impression formation, and the first Principal Component), suggesting that item popularity may be a useful heuristic tool for identifying items which elicit socially desirable responding. We diagnose the cause of socially desirable responding as an interaction between the evaluative content of the item and enhancement motivation in the rater. Study 2 introduced a possible cure; evaluative neutralization of items. To test the feasibility of the method lay psychometricians (undergraduates) reformulated existing personality test items according to written instructions. The new items were indeed lower in social desirability while essentially retaining the five factor structure and reliability of the inventory. We conclude that although neutralization is no miracle cure, it is simple and has beneficial effects.     

Accounting for the evaluative factor in self-ratings provides a more accurate estimate of the relationship between personality traits and well-being

Social desirability may cause spurious relations in self-rating measures. The present study sought to disentangle socially desirable responding and content in the relation between measures of personality traits and well-being. Social desirability was operationalized as the evaluative factor (the tendency to react to evaluative content in questionnaire items). We collected self- and peer-ratings of personality and self-ratings of well-being from 219 participants. The evaluative factor in personality self-ratings significantly predicted well-being and explained more variance than all Big Five traits combined. The evaluative factor in personality peer-ratings had no unique relation to well-being. These findings suggest that previous estimates of the relationship between personality traits and well-being have generally been exaggerated. Different methods of accounting for social desirability are discussed.     

What Mediates the Relationship Between Religious Service Attendance and Aspects of Well-Being?

Religious service attendance predicts increased well-being across a number of studies. It is not clear, however, whether this relationship is due to religious factors such as intrinsic religiosity or due to nonreligious factors such as social support or socially desirable responding. The purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship between religious service attendance and well-being while simultaneously examining intrinsic religiosity, social support, and socially desirable responding as potential mediators of the relationship. A sample of 855 participants (71 % female, average age 19.5) completed questionnaires assessing religiosity, social support, socially desirable responding, and well-being. Path models were estimated using maximum likelihood estimation to analyze the data. Intrinsic religiosity was the strongest mediator of the relationship between religious service attendance and depressive and anxiety symptoms. This suggests that the mental health benefits of religious service attendance are not simply the result of increased social support or a certain response style on questionnaires; rather, it appears that the relationship is at least partly the result of people trying to live their religion in their daily lives.     

Can confidentiality of data pay off?

Ss were administered a self-report personality measure and a social desirability scale under conditions of Confidentiality, Anonymity or Nonanonymity alone. The tester's written assurance that the Ss' disclosures would be kept strictly confidential had a substantial moderating effect (when compared with Nonanonymity alone) on correlations between some subscales of the personality measure and the social desirability scale. In contrast to an earlier finding, there were no appreciable effects of Anonymity when compared with Nonanonymity alone. It appears that confidentiality of data can pay off in terms of increased predictive validity of some self-report personality measures by moderating the potential biasing effect of test response distortion due to socially desirable responding.     

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.     

Not too little, but not too much: The perceived desirability of responses to personality items

Paradigms typically employed to investigate socially desirable responding in personality assessment implicitly assume linear relationships exist between trait level and desirability but recent research has called this assumption into question. In this study, participants rated the desirability of a hypothetical applicant to one of four jobs on the basis of which five-point Likert-type scale option he/she selected when responding to personality items. Results generally indicated that the most extreme option, on the desirable side of the response scale, was rated as most desirable, but perceived desirability asymptotes with the penultimate option. The middle (neutral) option, however, was consistently regarded as being much less desirable. The occupational context also significantly moderated the patterns of desirability ratings for many items.     

Cognitive style: a psycholexically‐derived personality‐centred model

Cognitive style suffers from a confusing multitude of conceptualizations, and dominance by information‐processing type measures. This study sought to elucidate a comprehensive and universal set of personality‐centred cognitive style constructs. A grounded approach based on the psycholexical hypothesis (effective in personality modelling) was adapted, explicating cognitive styles as evident in late adolescents. Approximately 700 Australian secondary teachers generated a lexicon of 1040 style adjectives, which were consolidated into 99 key words. 596 teachers rated 1192 senior secondary students against these. After removing acquiescence and a ubiquitous good–bad‐ability factor, optimum structure appears to be a spherex abridgeable as three circumplexes, reported across six factor pure and 24 blended facets. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Assessing item-feature effects with item response tree models

Recent applications of item response tree models demonstrate that this model class is well suited to detect midpoint and extremity response style effects in both attitudinal and personality measurements. This paper proposes an extension of this approach that goes beyond measuring response styles and allows us to examine item-feature effects. In a reanalysis of three published data sets, it is shown that the proposed extension captures item-feature effects across affirmative and reverse-worded items in a psychological test. These effects are found to affect directional responses but not midpoint and extremity preferences. Moreover, accounting for item-feature effects substantially improves model fit and interpretation of the construct measurement. The proposed extension can be implemented readily with current software programs that facilitate maximum likelihood estimation of item response models with missing data.     

A Meta‐Analytic Multitrait Multirater Separation of Substance and Style in Social Desirability Scales

Though unlikely virtues scales have a long history in personality, clinical, and applied psychology for detecting socially desirable responding, using such social desirability (SD) scales has generally failed to improve the validity of personality measures. We examined whether this is because (a) response distortion itself has minimal impact on personality's validity, (b) SD scales are ineffective at assessing response distortion, or (c) SD scales are conflated with substantive trait variance. We compiled a meta‐analytic multitrait multimethod matrix consisting of multirater personality traits, SD scales, and performance outcomes. We examined the influence of trait factors and self‐report method factors on SD scales and performance. We found that self‐report method variance (a) was negatively related to performance, (b) would suppress personality‐performance relationships for self‐report measures, and (c) was (partially) assessed by SD scales. However, relative to the effects of self‐report method variance, SD scales are even more strongly influenced by Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and Agreeableness. It is not the case that SD scales are insensitive to inflated responding but that their susceptibility to personality trait variance likely outweighs their benefits. We discuss the implications of these results for using SD scales in research and practice.