Data were collected from two undergraduate student samples to examine (i) the relations of the ‘Dark Triad’ variables (Machiavellianism, Psychopathy, and Narcissism) with the HEXACO personality dimensions, as well as (ii) the ability of the aforementioned characteristics and of the Big Five personality factors to predict outcome variables related to sex, power, and money. Results indicated that the common variance of the Dark Triad was very highly correlated with low Honesty–Humility and that the unique variance of each of the Dark Triad variables also showed theoretically meaningful relations with the other five HEXACO factors. Furthermore, the Dark Triad and Honesty–Humility were strong predictors of three domains of outcome variables—Sex (short‐term mating tendencies and sexual quid pro quos), Power (Social Dominance Orientation and desire for power), and Money (conspicuous consumption and materialism)—that were not well predicted by the dimensions of the Big Five. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Applicant use of impression management (IM) tactics plays a central role in employment interviews. IM includes behaviors intended to create an impression of competence and likability, and avoid negative impressions. Applicants can influence interviewers’ impressions using both honest and deceptive IM, but measurement of IM has yet to distinguish these two constructs. The goal of the present research was to develop a self‐report Honest Interview Impression Management (HIIM) measure and use this to investigate differential antecedents and consequences of honest and deceptive IM. We report the results of five independent studies (total N = 1,470 interviewees). Studies 1–3 detail the creation of a self‐report measure of honest IM. Studies 4 and 5 utilize this measure to understand the relations between honest and deceptive IM, and their antecedents and consequences. Results demonstrate that honest and deceptive IM are positively related but distinct constructs that have unique antecedents (i.e., age, individual differences, attitudes, situational, and target characteristics) and differentially impact interview outcomes and ratings. Finally, we present a short measure of honest and deceptive IM to be used for time‐sensitive data collection.

The authors obtained self-and observer reports of personality from pairs of well-acquainted college students. Consistent with previous findings, results of Study 1 showed strong cross-source agreement for all 6 HEXACO personality factors (rs Ϸ .55). In addition, the authors found modest levels of similarity (r Ϸ .25) between dyad members' self-reports on each of 2 dimensions, Honesty-Humility and Openness to Experience. For these same 2 factors, dyad members' self-reports were correlated with their observer reports of the other dyad member (r Ϸ .40), thus indicating moderately high assumed similarity. In Study 2, Honesty-Humility and Openness to Experience were the 2 personality factors most strongly associated with the 2 major dimensions of personal values, which also showed substantial assumed similarity. In Study 3, assumed similarity was considerably stronger for close friends than for nonfriend acquaintances. Results suggest that assumed similarity for Honesty-Humility and Openness to Experience reflects a tendency to overestimate one's similarity to persons with whom one has a close relationship, but only on those personality characteristics whose relevance to values gives them central importance to one's identity.

No abstract

No abstract