Beyond Impression Management: Evaluating three measures of response distortion and their relationship to job performance

Abstract

Three measures of response distortion (i.e., social desirability, covariance index, and implausible answers) were examined in both applicant and incumbent samples. Performance data, including supervisor ratings of task and contextual performance as well as objective performance criteria such as tardiness, work-related accidents, and a customized work simulation, were obtained for the incumbent sample. Results provided further support for the existence of applicant faking behavior and shed light into the relationship between faking and job performance, largely depending on how one defines and measures faking as well as the performance criteria evaluated. Implications for future research and practice in personality assessment for selection purposes were discussed.

Cross‐Cultural Differences in Applicant Faking on Personality Tests: A 43‐Nation Study

“…Yet other researchers hold a more balanced view on faking and its consequences, after showing that relationships between faking and job performance vary across selection methods and operationalisations (e.g. Ingold, Kleinmann, König, & Melchers, ; O'Connell, Kung, & Tristan, ; see also Peterson & Griffith, ; Peterson, Griffith, Isaacson, O'Connell, & Mangos, ).…”

Stop Interrupting Me! Examining the Relationship Between Interruptions, Test Performance and Reactions

“…The battery used three measurement methods: self-report personality measures, situational judgment scenarios, and interactive simulations. This assessment has been used in numerous peer-reviewed studies (e.g., Bott, O'Connell, Ramakrishnan, & Doverspike, 2007;O'Connell, Hartman, McDaniel, Grubb & Lawrence, 2007;O'Connell, Kung, & Tristan, 2011;Peterson, Griffith, Isaacson, O'Connell, Mangos, 2011) and has strong validation evidence to support it (Kung, Lawrence, & O'Connell, 2012). A final test score was calculated by averaging the 11 final competencies scores.…”

What is Applicant Faking Behavior? A Review on the Current State of Theory and Modeling Techniques

“…Additionally, examining response latencies has provided insights into response processes (Holden, Kroner, Fekken, & Popham, 1992;Holden & Lambert, 2015;Komar, Komar, Robie, & Taggar, 2010). The most used method of detecting faking in practical as well as research settings is using SDR scales (Goffin & Christiansen, 2003;O'Connell, Kung, & Tristan, 2011). However, these are highly correlated with personality traits (Christiansen et al, 2010;Ones et al, 1996), and are also susceptible to faking (Kroger & Turnbull, 1975;Viswesvaran & Ones, 1999).…”