Author ORCID Identifier
0000-0002-7770-7763
0000-0001-5013-7740
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2021.01.003
Abstract
Despite the established validity of personality measures for personnel selection, their susceptibility to faking has been a persistent concern. However, the lack of studies that combine generalizability with experimental control makes it difficult to determine the effects of applicant faking. This study addressed this deficit in two ways. First, we compared a subtle incentive to fake with the explicit “fake-good” instructions used in most faking experiments. Second, we compared standard Likert scales to multidimensional forced choice (MFC) scales designed to resist deception, including more and less fakable versions of the same MFC inventory. MFC scales substantially reduced motivated score elevation but also appeared to elicit selective faking on work-relevant dimensions. Despite reducing the effectiveness of impression management attempts, MFC scales did not retain more validity than Likert scales when participants faked. However, results suggested that faking artificially bolstered the criterion-related validity of Likert scales while diminishing their construct validity.
Recommended Citation
Huber, Christopher R.; Kuncel, Nathan R.; Huber, Katie B.; and Boyce, Anthony S.
(2021)
"Faking and the Validity of Personality Tests: An Experimental Investigation Using Modern Forced Choice Measures,"
Personnel Assessment and Decisions: Number 7
:
Iss.
1
, Article 3.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2021.01.003
Available at:
https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/pad/vol7/iss1/3
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Supplemental Materials
huber195@umn.edu
Included in
Human Resources Management Commons, Industrial and Organizational Psychology Commons, Other Psychology Commons