Author ORCID Identifier
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.
Huber, Christopher R.; Kuncel, Nathan R.; Huber, Katie B.; and Boyce, Anthony S.
"Faking and the Validity of Personality Tests: An Experimental Investigation Using Modern Forced Choice Measures,"
Personnel Assessment and Decisions: Number 7
, Article 3.
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.