Using principal component scores reduces the effect of socially desirable responding

Personality and Individual Differences

Volumn 53, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 279-283

  Saar, Kalev ^a   Aavik, Toivo ^a,d   Konstabel, Kenn ^a,b,c,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TARTU   (Estonia)

^b NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH DEVELOPMENT   (Estonia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^d Estonian Centre of Applied Psychology   (Estonia)

Author keywords

Evaluative bias; Factor scores; Five factor model; Self other agreement of personality ratings; Socially desirable responding

Indexed keywords

EID: 84861665734     PISSN: 01918869     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.03.030     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Anusic I., Schimmack U., Pincus R.T., Lockwood P. The nature and structure of correlations among Big Five ratings: The halo-alpha-beta model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2009, 97:1142-1156.
2. Bäckström M., Björklund F., Larsson M.F. Five-factor inventories have a major general factor related to social desirability which can be reduced by framing items neutrally framing items neutrally. Journal of Research in Personality 2009, 43:335-344.
3. Biderman M.D., Nguyen N.T., Cunningham C.J.L., Nhorbani N. The ubiquity of common method variance: The case of the Big Five. Journal of Research in Personality 2011, 45:417-429.
4. Connelly B.S., Ones D.Z. An other perspective on personality: Meta-analytic integration of observers' accuracy and predictive validity. Psychological Bulletin 2010, 136:1092-1122.
5. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI). Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc.
6. Davison A.C., Hinkley D.V. Bootstrap methods and their applications 1997, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
7. Ferrando P.J., Anguiano-Carrasco C. Faking propensity and faking-related change: A model-based analysis of the EPQ-R scores. Personality and Individual Differences 2011, 51:497-501.
8. Funder D.C., Colvin C.R. Congruence of other's and self-judgments of personality. Handbook of personality psychology 1997, 617-647. Academic Press, San Diego. R.R. Hogan, J. Johnson, S. Briggs (Eds.).
9. Hofstee W.K.B. Structures of personality traits. Handbook of psychology: Personality and social psychology 2003, Vol. 5:231-254. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
10. Jennrich R.I. An asymptotic χ2 test for the equality of two correlation matrices. Journal of American Statistical Association 1970, 65:904-912.
11. Kallasmaa T., Allik J., Realo A., McCrae R.R. The Estonian version of the NEO PI-R: An examination of universal and culture-specific aspects of the five-factor model. European Journal of Personality 2000, 14:265-278.
12. Kenny D.A. Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis 1994, Guilford Press, New York.
13. Konstabel K., Aavik T., Allik J. Social desirability and consensual validity of personality traits. European Journal of Personality 2006, 20:549-566.
14. McCrae R.R. Consensual validation of personality traits: Evidence from self-reports and ratings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1982, 43:293-303.
15. McCrae R.R., Costa P.T. Rotation to maximize the construct validity of factors in the NEO Personality Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research 1989, 24:107-124.
16. McCrae R.R., Costa P.T. Personality in adulthood: A Five-factor theory perspective 2003, The Guilford Press, New York. 2nd ed.
17. Ones D.S., Dilchert S., Viswesvaran C., Judge T.A. In support of personality assessment in organizational settings. Personnel Psychology 2007, 60:995-1027.
18. Paulhus D.L. Control of social desirability in personality inventories: Principal-factor deletion. Journal of Research in Personality 1981, 15:383-388.
19. Paulhus D.L., Bruce M.N. The effect of acquaintanceship on the validity of personality impressions: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1992, 63:816-824.
20. Paulhus D.L. Measurement and control of response bias. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes 1991, 17-59. Academic Press, San Diego. J.P. Robinson, P. Shaver, L.S. Wrightsman (Eds.).
21. Paunonen S.V., O'Neill T.A. Self-reports, peer ratings and construct validity. European Journal of Personality 2010, 24:189-206.
22. Petterson E., Turkheimer E. Item selection, evaluation, and simple structure in personality data. Journal of Research in Personality 2010, 44:407-420.
23. Saucier G. Separating description and evaluation in the structure of personality attributes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1994, 68:141-154.
24. Steiger J.H. Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin 1980, 57:442-456.
25. Barrett, P. T. (2010). Test reliability and validity. The inappropriate use of the Pearson and other variance ratio coefficients for indexing reliability and validity. http://www.pbarrett.net/techpapers/correlations_reliability_validity_Rev_1_July_2010.pdf.
26. Canty, A., & Ripley, B. (2010). boot: Bootstrap R (S-Plus) Functions. R package version 1.2-43. http://www.CRAN.R-project.org/package=boot.
27. R Development Core Team (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. http://www.R-project.org.
28. Revelle, W. (2010). psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research. R package version 1.0-67. http://www.CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych.