Not too little, but not too much: The perceived desirability of responses to personality items

Journal of Research in Personality

Volumn 46, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 8-18

  Dunlop, Patrick D ^a   Telford, Amelia D ^a   Morrison, David L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

Faking; HEXACO; High stakes; Impression management; Likert scale; Personality; Response desirability

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857137944     PISSN: 00926566     EISSN: 10957251     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2011.10.004     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Ashton M.C., Lee K. A theoretical basis for the major dimensions of personality. European Journal of Personality 2001, 15:327-353.
2. Ashton M.C., Lee K. Empirical, theoretical, and practical advantages of the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Social Psychology Review 2007, 11:150-166.
3. Birkeland S.A., Manson T.M., Kisamore J.L., Brannick M.T., Smith M.A. A meta-analytic investigation of job applicant faking on personality measures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2006, 14:317-335.
4. Borkenau P., Zaltauskas K., Leising D. More may be better but there may be too much: Optimal trait level and self-enhancement bias. Journal of Personality 2009, 77:825-858.
5. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychological Bulletin 1992, 112:155-159.
6. Dalen L.H., Stanton N.A., Roberts A.D. Faking personality questionnaires in personnel selection. The Journal of Management Development 2001, 20:729-742.
7. Edwards A.L. The relationship between the judged desirability of a trait and the probability that the trait will be endorsed. Journal of Applied Psychology 1953, 37:90-93.
8. Furnham A. Faking personality questionnaires: Fabricating different profiles for different purposes. Current Psychology: Research & Reviews 1990, 9:46-55.
9. Goffin R.D., Boyd A.C. Faking and personality assessment in personnel selection: Advancing models of faking. Canadian Psychology 2009, 50:151-160.
10. Goffin R.D., Jelley R., Powell D.M., Johnston N.G. Taking advantage of social comparisons in performance appraisal: The relative percentile method. Human Resource Management 2009, 48:251-268.
11. Goffin R.D., Olson J.M. Is it all relative? Comparative judgments and the possible improvement of self-ratings and ratings of others. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2011, 6:48-60.
12. Griffin B., Hesketh B., Grayson D. Applicants faking good: Evidence of item bias in the NEO PI-R. Personality and Individual Differences 2004, 36:1545-1558.
13. Krahe B. Faking personality profiles on a standard personality inventory. Personality and Individual Differences 1989, 10:437-443.
14. Kuncel N.R., Borneman M.J. Toward a new method of detecting deliberately faked personality tests: The use of idiosyncratic item responses. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2007, 15:220-231.
15. Kuncel N.R., Tellegen A. A conceptual and empirical reexamination of the measurement of the social desirability of items: Implications for detecting desirable response style and scale development. Personnel Psychology 2009, 62:201-228.
16. Lee K., Ashton M.C. Psychometric properties of the HEXACO personality inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research 2004, 39(2):329-358.
17. Lee K., Ashton M.C. Psychopathy, machiavellianism, and narcissism in the five-factor model and the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Individual Differences 2005, 38:1571-1582.
18. Mahar D., Coburn B., Griffin N., Hemeter F., Potappel C., Turton M., et al. Stereotyping as a response strategy when faking personality questionnaires. Personality and Individual Differences 2006, 40:1375-1386.
19. Mahar D., Cologon J., Duck J. Response strategies when faking personality questionnaires in a vocational selection setting. Personality and Individual Differences 1995, 18:605-609.
20. Morgeson F.P., Campion M.A., Dipboye R.L., Hollenbeck J.R., Murphy K., Schmitt N. Reconsidering the use of personality tests in personnel selection contexts. Personnel Psychology 2007, 60:683-729.
21. Pauls C.A., Crost N.W. Effects of different instructional sets on the construct validity of the NEO-PI-R. Personality and Individual Differences 2005, 39:297-308.
22. Rothstein M.G., Goffin R.D. The use of personality measures in personnel selection: What does current research support?. Human Resource Management Review 2006, 16:155-180.
23. Snell A.F., Sydell E.J., Lueke S.B. Towards a theory of applicant faking: Integrating studies of deception. Human Resource Management Review 1999, 9:219-242.
24. Yorke M. Bipolarity...or not? Some conceptual problems relating to bipolar rating scales. British Educational Research Journal 2001, 27:171-186.