A Model of Faking Likelihood in the Employment Interview

There has been surprisingly little research on faking in the employment interview, despite the fact that professional judgment would suggest that faking might occur in the interview. Based on a review of the literature on faking in personality tests and the literature on deception, we propose a model of faking during an employment interview and develop 19 testable propositions to guide future research. We argue that faking is a function of capacity, willingness, and opportunity to fake. Structured interviews provide less opportunity for intentional distortion; however, some components of structure may actually increase faking. Finally, job candidates distort their responses in job desirable ways.     

POTENTIAL VERSUS ACTUAL FAKING OF A BIODATA FORM: AN ANALYSIS ALONG SEVERAL DIMENSIONS OF ITEM TYPE

Two studies examined faking of a 25-item biodata questionnaire. The first study investigated potential and actual faking of the form using three groups: a group told to make themselves look as good as possible, a group told to complete the form honestly, and a group completing the instrument in a real selection situation. Subjects were 58 current employees and 231 job applicants. Results indicated that subjects could fake the instrument when instructed to do so. Also, some faking appeared to be occurring in practice, although results depended upon the composition of the comparison group. Only eight items appeared to be fakable, and only three of these seemed to be faked in practice. In Study 2, 26 business majors rated the biodata items on eight dimensions of item type. Results showed that the three items faked in practice were less historical, objective, discrete, verifiable, and external than other items, and were more job relevant.     

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.     

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%.     

人才甄选中的人格测验作假研究的深入与拓展

企业人才甄选情境下求职者很容易在人格测验中作假。至今有关作假的研究已包含作假的内涵、来源和识别等多个方面,也诞生了多种心理模型尝试解释作假产生的心理机制,如作假动机与作假能力交互作用理论、作假计划行为理论、作假整合模型、一般作假行为模型以及作假的VIE模型,为后续理论研究点明方向。此外,作假应用领域中新兴的网络人格测验作假受到关注,在此介绍网络与纸笔测验两种形式下,人格测验作假行为、作假意向的不同。     

Variance in faking across noncognitive measures

There are discrepant findings in the literature regarding the effects of applicant faking on the validity of noncognitive measures. One explanation for these mixed results may be the failure of some studies to consider individual differences in faking. This study demonstrates that there is considerable variance across individuals in the extent of faking 3 types of noncognitive measures (i.e., personality test, biodata inventory, and integrity test). Participants completed measures honestly and with instructions to fake. Results indicated some measures were more difficult to fake than others. The authors found that integrity, conscientiousness, and neuroticism were related to faking. In addition, individuals faked fairly consistently across the measures. Implications of these results and a model of faking that includes factors that may influence faking behavior are provided.     

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.     

Intentional response distortion on personality tests: using eye-tracking to understand response processes when faking

Intentional response distortion or faking among job applicants completing measures such as personality and integrity tests is a concern in personnel selection. The present study aimed to investigate whether eye-tracking technology can improve our understanding of the response process when faking. In an experimental within-participants design, a Big Five personality test and an integrity measure were administered to 129 university students in 2 conditions: a respond honestly and a faking good instruction. Item responses, response latencies, and eye movements were measured. Results demonstrated that all personality dimensions were fakeable. In support of the theoretical position that faking involves a less cognitively demanding process than responding honestly, we found that response times were on average 0.25 s slower and participants had less eye fixations in the fake good condition. However, in the fake good condition, participants had more fixations on the 2 extreme response options of the 5-point answering scale, and they fixated on these more directly after having read the question. These findings support the idea that faking leads to semantic rather than self-referenced item interpretations. Eye-tracking was demonstrated to be potentially useful in detecting faking behavior, improving detecting rates over and beyond response extremity and latency metrics.     

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.     

A CONCEPTUAL RATIONALE FOR THE DOMAIN AND ATTRIBUTES OF BIODATA ITEMS

There is considerable disagreement among researchers regarding the defining attributes of biodata items, especially in contrast to other self-report measures. This paper provides a conceptual rationale for the use of biodata in order to evaluate various proposed attributes of biodata, and to clarify similarities and differences between biodata and temperament items. It is suggested that the core attribute of biodata items is that the items pertain to historical events that may have shaped the person's behavior and identity. Other attributes advanced as antidotes to socially desirable responding and faking are that biodata items reflect external events, that they be limited to objective and first-hand recollections, that they be potentially verifiable, and that they measure discrete, unique events when appropriate. Some researchers also require that the life events being sampled be controllable and equally accessible to all respondents. Items may also need to be visibly job relevant and nonintrusive to avoid legal censure. Disagreements among researchers regarding the importance of these attributes are discussed, and implications for practice and research are proposed.     

Using Personality Testing for Personnel Selection: Faking and Test-Taking Inductions

This research assessed whether warning subjects that faked responses could be detected would reduce the amount of faking that might occur when using a personality test for selection of police officers. Also, personality test subscales which best differentiated honest from dissimulated responses were determined. Subjects (N=120) were randomly assigned to a straight-take (that is, respond honestly), fake good, or modified fake good group. Both fake good groups were instructed to respond to the test so as to appear favourably for the job; additionally, the modified fake good group was warned that faking could be detected and could reduce hiring chances. Multivariate analyses revealed significant differences on the Denial and Deviation subscales between the three conditions (p <0.01). The pattern of differences suggested that the threat of faking detection reduced faking. Potential application of these findings in personnel selection was discussed.     

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。     

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.     

Does perceived ability to deceive = ability to deceive? Predictive validity of the perceived ability to deceive (PATD) scale

This research investigated whether the perceived ability to deceive (PATD) scale predicts ability to deceive in a vocational testing context. Using a quasi-experimental design, participants (N = 85 student and community members) completed the PATD scale and a personality measure under standard instructions before being asked to fake the personality measure as if they were applying for a job in the police force. Based on extant research, successful faking was operationalised as elevated scores on conscientiousness and extraversion and reduced scores on neuroticism. Analysis via independent t-test did not support the hypothesis that PATD predicts faking success. Future research should consider the relationship between PATD and intention to fake, as well as extend examination of PATD to other deception-related contexts.     

How Emotional Intelligence Might Get You the Job: The Relationship Between Trait Emotional Intelligence and Faking on Personality Tests

This study examined trait emotional intelligence (EI) in relation to the ability to fake on personality tests. Undergraduate students (N = 129) were first instructed to fill out a personality inventory honestly, and subsequently in such a way as to maximize their chances of obtaining two distinctive job positions (lawyer and file clerk). Participants were able to change their scores in line with the hypothesized job profiles. Regression analyses showed that EI statistically predicted faking ability to an equal degree in both job scenarios. Finally, EI showed incremental validity over general mental ability and the Big Five personality traits in predicting the ability to fake. Possible implications of the results for the predictive validity of personality tests are discussed.     

A Biodata Inventory Administered via Interactive Voice Response (IVR) Technology: Predictive Validity, Utility, and Subgroup Differences

Although organizations are increasingly using interactive voice response (IVR) systems to help screen and select job applicants, few if any published studies have investigated the effectiveness of such systems. The current study responded to this need by evaluating a biodata inventory administered via IVR technology. A predictive validity study revealed that both a 42-item biodata measure and a more parsimonious 6-item composite correlated with supervisor ratings of performance and did not result in adverse impact or differential prediction. In addition, a utility analysis indicated that both IVR biodata measures would likely result in considerable financial gains to the hiring organization. The implications of these results for selection research and practice are discussed.     

Specification of Scales in Biodata Form Development: Rational vs. Empirical and Global vs. Specific

Although empirical keying has been the most popular scoring strategy with biodata, researchers have increasingly argued that rational approaches are better for advancing theory. Higher validities and less faking with empirical keys, however, have made many reluctant to abandon them. Research in the personality field provided support for the notion that many rational biodata scales may be multi-faceted. Development of more specific scales was suggested as a technique for creating rational scales with validities that more closely approximate that of empirical keys. Three different strategies (rational, internal, and external/empirical) were used in the scoring of a biodata inventory for use with mechanical equipment franchise owners. The rational and internal approaches were investigated within two samples and at two levels - very specific constructs and global constructs. In addition, two types of criteria were used, including an objective measure of sales and supervisory performance ratings. The specific rational scales were as predictive as the empirical item key. Strategies for developing and scoring a biodata form using a rational approach are discussed.     

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.     

An assessment of the fakeability of self-report and implicit personality measures

Researchers are focusing on developing implicit measures of personality to address concerns related to the faking of self-report measures. The present study examined the validity and fakeability of Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures of personality self-concept in a repeated-measures design (N = 33). People’s predictions about how they represented themselves on the measures were also assessed. Results indicated that participants were able fake self-report measures when instructed to do so and that they could accurately predict how they represented themselves on these measures. Participants were also able to fake an IAT measure of Extraversion, but were unable to fake an IAT measure of Conscientiousness or predict how they represented themselves on either IAT measure.     

The role of fluid and emotional intelligence in malingering

The purpose of the present study was to examine the role of fluid (gf), social (SI) and emotional intelligence (EI) in faking the Beck Depression Inventory (2nd ed., BDI‐II). Twenty‐two students and 26 non‐students completed Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM), a social insight test, the Schutte et al. self‐report EI scale, and the BDI‐II under honest and faking instructions. Results were consistent with a new model of successful faking, in which a participant's original response must be manipulated into a strategic response, which must match diagnostic criteria. As hypothesised, the BDI‐II could be faked, and gf was not related to faking ability. Counter to expectations, however, SI and EI were not related to faking ability. A second study explored why EI failed to facilitate faking. Forty‐nine students and 50 non‐students completed the EI measure, the Marlowe‐Crown Scale and the Levenson et al. Psychopathy Scale. As hypothesised, EI was negatively correlated with psychopathy, but EI showed no relationship with socially desirable responding. It was concluded that in the first experiment, high‐EI people did fake effectively, but high‐psychopathy people (who had low EI) were also faking effectively, resulting in a distribution that showed no advantage to high EI individuals.