Predictors of faking behavior on personality inventories in selection: Do indicators of the ability and motivation to fake predict faking?

Abstract

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Valence, Instrumentality, Expectancy, and Ability as Determinants of Faking, and the Effects of Faking on Criterion-Related Validity

“…In the context of our study, the indirect measure of instrumentality, namely the participants' estimate of the base rates or norms around faking was not associated with faking. This pattern was also observed by Holtrop et al (2021) in their study of real job applicants. In this study, participants' estimates of how many other applicants would fake strongly showed a very wide range (0-80%).…”

“…Bott et al (2010), however, did not observe an association of integrity with participants' trait score elevations for a hypothetical job application assessment, and Schilling et al (2020), using a similar classical lab design, also did not find associations with honesty-humility with faking. Further, more recently, in a study of real applicants to fire-fighter jobs who participated in a research project 3 months after their applications, Holtrop et al (2021) did not observe a relation of faking in the job application with honesty-humility; however, we note that very little faking was observed in that study overall. Nonetheless, following the VIE model, here we examined whether those with a greater trait-like proclivity to deceive were more motivated to fake and test the following hypothesis: H1b: Honesty-humility is negatively associated with faking on the diligence and perfectionism scales.…”

“…Ellingson and McFarland (2011) proposed that instrumentality perceptions would be higher among respondents who believed that other applicants would be faking their responses. Holtrop et al (2021) asked their sample of firefighter applicants to estimate the percentage of the applicant pool who had responded completely honestly, managed impressions a little, and outright fabricated their responses to the personality questionnaire that was used for selection. Although these researchers found that this "faking norm" variable was not associated with observed faking, again, there was very little faking observed in their study overall.…”

“…Because most personality assessments used for selection contain several scales, some of which may not be used for selection decision making, we thought it most appropriate to frame instrumentality with reference to the whole measure. Nonetheless, future researchers could consider assessing instrumentality in relation to specific personality content, much like recent attempts to do so with respect to the ability to identify criteria (Holtrop et al, 2021).…”

Effect of job applicant faking and cognitive ability on self‐other agreement and criterion validity of personality assessments

“…A study by Cucina et al (2019) found no significant effect of cognitive ability but used a relatively small sample of 162 university students, divided into an honest and an applicant group. A study by Holtrop et al (2021) used a repeated‐measures sample of firefighter applicants completing tests during a job application and then again later, in an honest condition, but found no effect of cognitive ability. However, the authors point out that relatively little faking was found, with which to test the influence of cognitive ability.…”