Methods of Measuring Faking Behavior

Abstract

This article reviews different methods of measuring the extent that faking has distorted responses to a personality test. Based on the idea that faking causes shifts in the means and construct relationships, a three-factor framework is proposed for classifying such measures based on the data required for computation and the effect of faking that the measure is intended to gauge. Advantages and disadvantages for each method are discussed along with recommendations for measuring faking in research and practice.

Using Personality Measures for Selection Decisions: Predictive Utility and Applicants' Faking Behaviour (Thesis)

“…Neben den praktischen Implikationen von Faking bedarf es aus wissenschaftlicher Sicht noch eines Erkenntnisgewinns zum Faking-Prozess (Burns & Christiansen, 2011;. Ist Faking ein Prozess, der reproduziert werden kann, oder ist dieser bei Zulassungsverfahren derart komplex, dass er es nicht werden kann?…”

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

“…However, these scales have been criticized for being correlated with personality traits and fakeable themselves (Burns & Christiansen, 2011;Ones et al, 1996). Thus, the inability of SDR scales to detect faking strongly contrasts their actual spread in personnel selection.…”

“…Currently, a number of methods of measuring faking exist (for an overview, see Christiansen, 2011 and, used in research as well as in personnel selection. O'Connell and colleagues (2011) demonstrated that different detectors of faking result in different classifications of respondents.…”

“…This definition subsumes every possible applicant behavior and therefore describes a broader concept than faking theories address. However, social desirability responding, as well as, the conscious part of it, impression management (Paulhus, 1984), have also been criticized for having little in common with actual faking behavior (Burns & Christiansen, 2011;Tett & Christiansen, 2007). Another issue of practical research is the simplification of faking as an attempt of score maximization.…”

How Emotional Intelligence Might Get You the Job: The Relationship Between Trait Emotional Intelligence and Faking on Personality Tests

“…A difference score is by definition correlated with the components from which it is derived (Burns & Christiansen, 2011;Pedhazur & Schmelkin, 1991). Thus, if trait EI is highly correlated with a personality facet in the honest condition, then this shared variance between EI and the facet itself could be responsible for any relation found between EI and the difference score based on this facet.…”