Faking and the Validity of Personality: A Monte Carlo Investigation

Komar, Shawn; Theakston, Jennifer; Brown, Douglas J.; Robie, Chet

doi:10.1037/e518612013-090

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both of these studies suggested that combining personality with other predictors can reduce the effects of faking. Komar et al (2005) found that adding a cognitive ability measure to a conscientiousness scale reduced the negative effects of faking on criterion‐related validity and utility. Peterson and Griffith (2007) found that basing selection on cognitive ability and conscientiousness scores reduced the number of fakers hired relative to conscientiousness‐only selection.…”

Section: Faking and Multiple Predictorsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Beyond being good selection practice, the use of additional valid predictors would seem to have the potential to reduce any negative effects of faking behavior. Although researchers have hinted at the potential for faking to be less of a concern in multiple‐predictor batteries (e.g., Hough et al , 1990), with the exception of two recent conference papers (Komar, Theakston, Brown, & Robie, 2005; Peterson & Griffith, 2007), very little research has empirically examined this assumption. Both of these studies suggested that combining personality with other predictors can reduce the effects of faking.…”

Section: Faking and Multiple Predictorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Faking on Personality Measures: Implications for selection involving multiple predictors

Converse

Peterson

Griffith

2009

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The potential for faking on noncognitive measures in high stakes testing situations remains a concern for many selection researchers and practitioners. However, the majority of previous research examining the practical effects of faking on noncognitive assessments has focused on these measures in isolation, rather than the more common situation in which they are used in combination with other predictors. The present simulation examined the effects of faking on a conscientiousness measure on criterionrelated validity, mean performance of those selected, and selection decision consistency when hiring decisions were based on this measure alone vs in combination with two other predictors across a range of likely selection scenarios. Overall, results indicated that including additional predictors substantially reduced -but did not eliminate -the negative effects of faking. Faking effects varied across outcomes and selection scenarios, with effects ranging from trivial to noteworthy even for multiple-predictor selection. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Faking and Multiple Predictorsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Faking and Multiple Predictorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Faking on Personality Measures: Implications for selection involving multiple predictors

Converse

Peterson

Griffith

2009

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Others have proposed that lie scales (e.g., Ones & Viswesvaran, 1998) or response latency (e.g., Holden, 1995) be used to try to identify those applicants who are faking. Still others have made the case that self‐report personality information be combined with information from other selection instruments (e.g., cognitive ability tests) less susceptible to faking (e.g., Komar, Theakston, Brown, & Robie, 2005). There are doubtless other methods we have not mentioned.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Faking in Personnel Selection: Tradeoffs in Performance Versus Fairness Resulting From Two Cut‐score Strategies

Berry

Sackett

2009

Personnel Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most faking research has examined the use of personality measures when using top‐down selection. We used simulation to examine the use of personality measures in selection systems using cut scores and outlined a number of issues unique to these situations. In particular, we compared the use of 2 methods of setting cut scores on personality measures: applicant‐data‐derived (ADD) and nonapplicant‐data‐derived (NADD) cut‐score strategies. We demonstrated that the ADD strategy maximized mean performance resulting from the selection system in the face of applicant faking but that this strategy also resulted in the displacement of deserving applicants by fakers (which has fairness implications). On the other hand, the NADD strategy minimized displacement of deserving applicants but at the cost of some mean performance. Therefore, the use of the ADD versus NADD strategies can be viewed as a strategic decision to be made by the organization, as there is a tradeoff between the 2 strategies in effects on performance versus fairness to applicants. We quantitatively outlined these tradeoffs at various selection ratios, levels of validity, and amounts of faking in the applicant pool.

show abstract

Faking and the Validity of Personality: A Monte Carlo Investigation

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Faking on Personality Measures: Implications for selection involving multiple predictors

Faking on Personality Measures: Implications for selection involving multiple predictors

Faking in Personnel Selection: Tradeoffs in Performance Versus Fairness Resulting From Two Cut‐score Strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About