No abstract

AGE-OLD criticisms have been directed toward the use of personality measures in employment situations. A large number of critics have pointed to the demonstrated fakability of conventional instruments for this purpose. Inventory and questionnaire responses may easily be falsified, to an extent determined by the ability or tendency of the applicant to give a favorable impression of himself.Researchers have provided rather definitive evidence in this regard. For example, TifIin and McCormick (1958) report a study which showed that the Humm-Wadsworth Temperament Scale could be faked. Meehl and Hathaway (1946) have found the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory fakable and developed the K scale to "correct" various MMPI scores for this tendency. Wesman (1952) demonstrated similar results with the Bernreuter Personality Inventory. These studies are perhaps representative of the enormous amount of fakability evidence available concerning traditional personality instruments.Continued attempts at personality measurement have aimed at either correcting for or eliminating this defect. A fairly recent approach toward minimizing or eliminating self-report faking is that of the "forced-choice'' technique. Various test authors have hopefully incorporated this principle in personality test development. 13

No abstract

This study investigated possible faking of the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule in an industrial selection situation. EPPS scores for 97 Retail sales applicants and 66 Industrial sales applicants (all later hired) were compared to those of scores of 69 Retail salesmen and 49 Industrial salesmen (all tested on the job). Results showed that Retail applicants tended to score significantly higher on Orderliness, Intraception, and Dominance scales and lower on the Heterosexuality scale than Retail salesmen. No significant differences were found, however, between Industrial applicants and Industrial salesmen. This suggests that persons more oriented toward selling in terms of interests and personality (i.e., Retail sales applicants) are more likely to distort answers to the EPPS.

No abstract