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.     

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.     

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.     

Fairness from the Applicant's Perspective: Reactions to Employee Selection Procedures

Applicants' reactions to selection procedures were examined in terms of the satisfaction and/or violation of 10 procedural justice rules. Critical incidents (n= 237) of fair and unfair treatment during selection were collected from 31 individuals who had recently experienced job search and hiring processes. Incidents were categorized into 10 procedural justice rules and the distribution of these incidents was examined for different hiring outcomes and different selection procedures. Dominant procedural concerns reflected selection procedure job relatedness and interpersonal treatment applicants received. Accepted applicants were primarily concerned about consistency of treatment, while rejected applicants were more concerned with timely feedback and blatant bias. Ease of faking was the primary procedural concern of applicants taking honesty and personality tests, while job relatedness was the primary concern with ability and work sample tests. Research issues were discussed and a number of practical suggestions were offered in terms of minimizing applicants' negative reactions to the selection process.     

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.     

Personnel selection as a signaling game

Personnel selection involves exchanges of information between job market actors (applicants and organizations). These actors do not have an incentive to exchange accurate information about their ability and commitment to the employment relationship unless it is to their advantage. This state of affairs explains numerous phenomena in personnel selection (e.g., faking). Signaling theory describes a mechanism by which parties with partly conflicting interests (and thus an incentive for deception) can nevertheless exchange accurate information. We apply signaling theory to personnel selection, distinguishing between adaptive relationships between applicants and organizations, among applicants, and among organizations. In each case, repeated adaptations and counteradaptations between actors can lead to situations of equilibrium or escalation (arms races). We show that viewing personnel selection as a network of adaptive relationships among job market actors enables an understanding of both classic and underexplored micro- and macro-level selection phenomena and their dynamic interactions.     

FAKING IN PERSONNEL SELECTION: TRADEOFFS IN PERFORMANCE VERSUS FAIRNESS RESULTING FROM TWO CUT-SCORE STRATEGIES

Most faking research has examined the use of personality measures when using top-down selection. We used simulation to examine the use of personality measures in selection systems using cut scores and outlined a number of issues unique to these situations. In particular, we compared the use of 2 methods of setting cut scores on personality measures: applicant-data-derived (ADD) and nonapplicant-data-derived (NADD) cut-score strategies. We demonstrated that the ADD strategy maximized mean performance resulting from the selection system in the face of applicant faking but that this strategy also resulted in the displacement of deserving applicants by fakers (which has fairness implications). On the other hand, the NADD strategy minimized displacement of deserving applicants but at the cost of some mean performance. Therefore, the use of the ADD versus NADD strategies can be viewed as a strategic decision to be made by the organization, as there is a tradeoff between the 2 strategies in effects on performance versus fairness to applicants. We quantitatively outlined these tradeoffs at various selection ratios, levels of validity, and amounts of faking in the applicant pool.     

Effects of Individual Differences on Applicant Perceptions of an Operational Assessment Center

Knowing to what extent applicant reactions are related to stable individual differences and not only to characteristics of a selection procedure is important for the design and administration of the selection procedure and for dealing with applicants. The aim of this study was to explore relationships between individual differences (Big Five, core self‐evaluations, trait affectivity, and general mental ability) and applicants' perceptions of an operational assessment center (AC). Data from 294 applicants revealed that individual difference variables explained significant variance in their perceptions of the AC, even after controlling for self‐rated and actual performance. Based on these results, the nature of the applicant pool should be considered for designing selection procedures, dealing with applicants, and for research purposes.     

The impact of corrections for faking on the validity of noncognitive measures in selection settings

In selection research and practice, there have been many attempts to correct scores on noncognitive measures for applicants who may have faked their responses somehow. A related approach with more impact would be identifying and removing faking applicants from consideration for employment entirely, replacing them with high-scoring alternatives. The current study demonstrates that under typical conditions found in selection, even this latter approach has minimal impact on mean performance levels. Results indicate about .1 SD change in mean performance across a range of typical correlations between a faking measure and the criterion. Where trait scores were corrected only for suspected faking, and applicants not removed or replaced, the minimal impact the authors found on mean performance was reduced even further. By comparison, the impact of selection ratio and test validity is much larger across a range of realistic levels of selection ratios and validities. If selection researchers are interested only in maximizing predicted performance or validity, the use of faking measures to correct scores or remove applicants from further employment consideration will produce minimal effects.     

Do Applicants Fake Their Personality Questionnaire Responses and How Successful are Their Attempts? A Case of Military Pilot Cadet Selection

This paper presents the results of three interrelated studies investigating the occurrence of response distortion on personality questionnaires within selection and the success of applicants in faking situations. In Study 1, comparison of the Big Five personality scores obtained from applicants in a military pilot cadet selection procedure with participants responding honestly, faking good, and faking an ideal candidate revealed that applicants responded more desirable than participants responding honestly but less desirable than respondents under fake instructions. The occurrence of faking within the military pilot selection process was replicated in Study 2 using the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire and another comparison group. Finally, in Study 3, comparison of personality profiles obtained in selection and ‘fake job’ situations with experts' estimates indicated that participants were partially successful in faking the desirable profile.     

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.     

Administrative Assumptions in Top‐Down Selection: A Test in Graduate School Admission Decisions

Although top‐down selection is the gold standard for making personnel decisions, several administrative assumptions must be met for it to be effective. We discuss three of these assumptions and test two of them: (1) top applicants will accept an offer, and (2) the time organisations give applicants to consider an offer will not influence the availability of next‐tier applicants. We also examine the effectiveness of top‐down selection by comparing it to an administratively simpler procedure, random selection above a threshold. Using archival admissions data from three university graduate psychology programs, we found that top applicants were less likely to accept an offer; however, waiting time did not influence applicant availability. In comparing the quality of applicants actually selected (with a top‐down procedure) with the quality of applicants selected at random (from above five progressively stringent thresholds), we found that at higher admission thresholds, random selection resulted in better or equal quality applicants as top‐down selection, depending on the criteria. We discuss implications for future research and practice.     

JUDGMENTS OF FIT IN THE SELECTION PROCESS: THE ROLE OF WORK VALUE CONGRUENCE

Work values were examined as an antecedent of recruiters' judgments of applicant fit with the organization. Data were collected on the work values of recruiters, their organizations, and job applicants in actual job interviews conducted through the placement center of a large university. Following the interviews, recruiters evaluated applicants' general employability and organization-specific fit. Approximately 4 months following the interviews, data on whether the applicants were invited for a second interview were also obtained. Work value congruence between the applicant and the recruiter was found to be related to judgments of general employability and organization-specific fit. Congruence between the applicant and the organization (as perceived by the recruiter) was not related to judgments of employability and organization-specific fit. Recruiter ratings of employability were related to the decision to invite the applicant for a second interview. Work value congruence was not related to second interview decisions. It is concluded that if work values and judgments of applicant fit influence the personnel selection process, they are more likely to do so at later stages when job offer decisions are made. Work values and judgments of applicant fit seem to have minimal impact on decisions to retain the applicant for additional consideration in early stages of the selection process.     

E‐Recruitment: A study into applicant perceptions of an online application system

Little is known about applicant reactions to web‐based recruitment and selection procedures. This study examines applicant perceptions of web‐based procedures, based on a field study among 1360 applicants to a multinational financial services organization applying for jobs in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Belgium. With respect to the personal characteristics it was found that external (as opposed to internal), Belgian (as opposed to Dutch), and Internet savvy (as opposed to less savvy) candidates were more satisfied with the online application procedure and its features. However, it was found that features of the website, perceived efficiency and user‐friendliness, were by far the most important determinants of applicant satisfaction. Implications for organizations and future research on E‐recruitment are discussed.     

A Prototype Matching Approach to Understanding the Role of Applicant Gender and Age in the Evaluation of Job Applicants1

This research uses a prototype matching approach to understand how job applicant evaluations are made and the role that applicant gender and age play in these evaluations. It is hypothesized that raters represent information about jobs and jobholders in person-in-job prototypes. Raters evaluate applicants by matching information about applicants to the person-in-job prototype associated with the job for which the applicant is applying. Person-in-job prototypes are comprised of features that are more (i.e., central) or less (i.e., peripheral) strongly associated with the prototype. Three laboratory studies examined several hypotheses derived from a prototype matching approach. Results indicated that applicants who matched on more central features were evaluated more favorably than applicants who matched on fewer central features of person-in-job prototypes. In addition, applicants who matched on age were evaluated more favorably than applicants who did not match on age when age was a central but not a peripheral feature of a person-in-job prototype. However, applicants who matched on gender were not evaluated differently from applicants who did not match on gender when gender was a central or a peripheral feature of a person-in-job prototype. Finally, there was some evidence that raters used applicant gender in a complex manner when evaluating applicants. Implications for theory and research on bias in selection are discussed.     

Gender Bias in Leader Selection? Evidence from a Hiring Simulation Study

The present research investigated factors that might affect gender discrimination in a hiring simulation context from the perspectives of social role theory and the shifting standards model. Specifically, the experimental study investigated whether gender biases are evident in the screening and hiring stage of the personnel selection process depending on the applicants?? social role and evaluators?? gender. A sample of German undergraduate business students (54 women, 53 men) was asked to make a personnel selection decision (short-listing or hiring) about a fictitious applicant (man or woman) in a specific role (leader or non-leader) for a managerial position. Consistent with social role theory??s assumption that social role information is more influential than gender information, participants selected applicants described as leaders over applicants described as non-leaders, regardless of applicant gender. In addition, in the presence of role information, female applicants portrayed as leaders were similarly short-listed and hired as male applicants with the same credentials. In the absence of role information, female applicants were similarly short-listed as male applicants; however, male applicants were hired over female applicants, albeit by male participants only. This is consistent with the shifting standards model??s assumption that group members are held to a higher standard to confirm traits on which they are perceived to be deficient: Male participants hired female applicants portrayed as non-leaders with less certainty than their male counterparts possibly due to higher confirmatory standards for leadership ability in women than men. The research and practice implications of these results are discussed.     

Cross-Cultural Differences in the Attitude Toward Applicants’ Faking in Job Interviews

Purpose

This study questions whether applicants with different cultural backgrounds are equally prone to fake in job interviews, and thus systematically examines cross-cultural differences regarding the attitude toward applicants’ faking (an important antecedent of faking and a gateway for cultural influences) on a large scale.

Design/Methodology/Approach

Using an online survey, employees’ (N = 3252) attitudes toward faking were collected in 31 countries. Cultural data were obtained from the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness project (GLOBE).

Findings

Attitude toward faking can be differentiated into two correlated forms (severe/mild faking). On the country level, attitudes toward faking correlate in the expected manner with four of GLOBE’s nine cultural dimensions: uncertainty avoidance, power distance, in-group collectivism, and gender egalitarianism. Furthermore, humane orientation correlates positively with attitude toward severe faking.

Implications

For international personnel selection research and practice, an awareness of whether and why there are cross-cultural differences in applicants’ faking behavior is of utmost importance. Our study urges practitioners to be conscious that applicants from different cultures may enter selection situations with different mindsets, and offers several practical implications for international personnel selection.

Originality/Value

Cross-cultural research has been expected to answer questions of whether applicants with different cultural backgrounds fake to the same extent during personnel selection. This study examines and explains cross-cultural differences in applicants’ faking in job interviews with a comprehensive sample and within a coherent theoretical framework.

     

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.     

What is in Applicants' Minds When They Fill Out a Personality Test? Insights from a qualitative study

Many practitioners fear that applicants will fake if they are asked to fill out a personality test. Although this fear has inspired much research, it remains unknown what applicants think when they fill out a questionnaire. Thus, we conducted a qualitative interview study that was guided by grounded theory principles. We interviewed (a) real applicants directly after filling out a personality test; (b) real applicants who had filled out a personality test in their past job hunt; (c) hypothetical job applicants whom we asked to imagine being an applicant and to fill out a personality test; and (d) hypothetical applicants who had much experience with personality tests. Theoretical saturation was achieved after interviewing 23 people. A content analysis showed that much is going on in applicants' minds – that which is typically subsumed under the expression ‘faking’ actually consists of many facets. In particular, participants assumed that the interpretation of their responses could be based on (a) the consistency of their responses; (b) the endorsement of middle versus extreme answers; and (c) a certain profile, and these assumptions resulted in corresponding self‐presentation strategies. However, these strategies were not used by all participants. Some answered honestly, for different reasons ranging from honesty as a personality trait to the (false) belief that test administrators can catch fakers. All in all, this study questions whether measuring mean changes in classical faking studies captures all important facets.     

Applicant Selection Expectations: Validating a multidimensional measure in the military

Research has suggested the importance of applicants' expectations of forthcoming selection procedures in predicting how applicants react to selection procedures. Validated measures of selection expectations are still scarce, however. This study reports on the validation of the Applicant Expectation Survey (AES), intended to measure applicants' expectations of forthcoming selection procedures. The AES was validated using three military applicant samples and showed sound psychometric properties (i.e., reliability, measurement invariance, discriminant validity) for a five‐factorial oblique structure consisting of 26 items. The five factors (i.e., Warmth/respect, Chance to demonstrate potential, Difficulty of faking, Unbiased assessment, Feedback) were positively related to several organizational outcome measures and to applicants' perceptions of the selection procedure, providing evidence for the predictive validity of the AES.