Correction to Van Hooft and Born, ( Intentional Response Distortion on Personality Tests: Using Eye-Tracking to Understand Response Processes When Faking, Journal of Applied Psychology [2012] Vol. 97, No. 2, pp. 301-316. doi: 10.1037/a0025711);Intentional response distortion on personality tests: Using eye-tracking to understand response processes when faking

Journal of Applied Psychology

Volumn 97, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 301-316

  van Hooft, Edwin A J ^a   Born, Marise Ph ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Eye tracking; Faking; Integrity; Personality test; Response latency

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DECEPTION; EYE FIXATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; OCULOGRAPHY; PERSONALITY TEST; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REACTION TIME; STANDARD;

ADULT; DECEPTION; EYE MOVEMENT MEASUREMENTS; FEMALE; FIXATION, OCULAR; HUMANS; MALE; PERSONALITY INVENTORY; PERSONALITY TESTS; REACTION TIME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84864527402     PISSN: 00219010     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0038046     Document Type: Erratum

References (71)

1. Alliger, G. M., & Dwight, S. A. (2000). A meta-analytic investigation of the susceptibility of integrity tests to faking and coaching. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 59-72. doi:10.1177/00131640021970367
2. Bachman, J. G., & O'Malley, P. M. (1984). Yea-saying, nay-saying, and going to extremes: Black-White differences in response styles. Public Opinion Quarterly, 48, 491-509. doi:10.1086/268845
3. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1996). Effects of impression management and self-deception on the predictive validity of personality constructs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 261-272. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.3.261
4. Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 9-30. doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00160
5. Birkeland, S. A., Manson, T. M., Kisamore, J. L., Brannick, M. T., & Smith, M. A. (2006). A meta-analytic investigation of job applicant faking on personality measures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 317-335. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00354.x
6. Brunetti, D. G., Schlottmann, R. S., Scott, A. B., & Hollrah, J. L. (1998). Instructed faking and MMPI-2 response latencies: The potential for assessing response validity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54, 143-153. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(199802)54:2<143::AID-JCLP3>3.0.CO;2-T
7. Burns, G. N., & Christiansen, N. D. (2006). Sensitive or senseless: On the use of social desirability measures in selection and assessment. In R. L. Griffith & M. H. Peterson (Eds.), A closer examination of applicant faking behavior (pp. 115-150). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
8. Calvo, M. G., & Avero, P. (2002). Eye movement assessment of emotional processing in anxiety. Emotion, 2, 105-117. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.2.2.105
9. Calvo, M. G., & Avero, P. (2005). Time course of attentional bias to emotional scenes in anxiety: Gaze direction and duration. Cognition & Emotion, 19, 433-451. doi:10.1080/02699930441000157
10. Casey, M. M., & Tryon, W. W. (2001). Validating a double-press method for computer administration of personality inventory items. Psychological Assessment, 13, 521-530. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.13.4.521
11. Costa, P. T., Jr., & 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.
12. De Fruyt, F., McCrae, R. R., Szirmak, Z., & Nagy, J. (2004). The Five-Factor Personality Inventory as a measure of the Five-Factor Model:Belgian, American, and Hungarian Comparisons with the NEO-PI-R. Assessment, 11, 207-215. doi:10.1177/1073191104265800
13. DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 74-118. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74
14. Donovan, J. J., Dwight, S. A., & Hurtz, G. M. (2003). An assessment of the prevalence, severity, and verifiability of entry-level applicant faking using the randomized response technique. Human Performance, 16, 81-106. doi:10.1207/S15327043HUP1601_4
15. Douglas, E. F., McDaniel, M. A., & Snell, A. F. (1996). The validity of non-cognitive measures decays when applicants fake. In J. B. Keyes & L. N. Dosier (Eds.), Academy of Management Proceedings (pp. 127-131). Madison, WI: Omnipress.
16. Duchovski, A. T. (2003). Eye tracking methodology: Theory and practice. New York, NY: Springer.
17. Dunn, W. S., Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Ones, D. S. (1995). Relative importance of personality and general mental ability in managers' judgments of applicant qualifications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 500-509. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.80.4.500
18. Efron, B. (1987). Better bootstrap confidence intervals. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 171-185. doi:10.2307/2289144
19. Ellingson, J. E., Smith, D. B., & Sackett, P. R. (2001). Investigating the influence of social desirability on personality factor structure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 122-133. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.122
20. Everling, S., & Fisher, B. (1998). The antisaccade: A review of basic research and clinical studies. Neuropsychologia, 36, 885-899. doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(98)00020-7
21. Fluckinger, C. D., McDaniel, M. A., & Whetzel, D. L. (2008). Review of faking in personnel selection. In M. Mandel (Ed.), In search of the right personnel (pp. 90-109). New Delhi, India: McMillian.
22. Griffin, B., Hesketh, B., & Grayson, D. (2004). Applicants faking good: Evidence of item bias in the NEO PI-R. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1545-1558. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.06.004
23. Griffith, R. L., Chmielowski, T., & Yoshita, Y. (2007). Do applicants fake? An examination of the frequency of applicant faking behavior. Personnel Review, 36, 341-355. doi:10.1108/00483480710731310
24. Griffith, R. L., Malm, T., English, A., Yoshita, Y., & Gujar, A. (2006). Applicant faking behavior: Teasing apart the influence of situational variance, cognitive biases, and individual differences. In R. L. Griffith & M. H. Peterson (Eds.), A closer examination of applicant faking behavior (pp. 151-177). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
25. Griffith, R. L., & Peterson, M. H. (2008). The failure of social desirability measures to capture applicant faking behavior. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 308-311. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2008.00053.x
26. Hendriks, A. A. J., Hofstee, W. K. B., & De Raad, B. (1999). The Five-Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI). Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 307-325. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00245-1
27. Holden, R. R. (1998). Detecting fakers on a personnel test: Response latencies versus a standard validity scale. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 13, 387-398.
28. Holden, R. R., Fekken, G. C., & Cotton, D. H. G. (1991). Assessing psychopathology using structured test-item response latencies. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3, 111-118.
29. Holden, R. R., Fekken, G. C., & Jackson, D. N. (1985). Structured personality test item characteristics and validity. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 386-394. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(85)90007-8
30. Holden, R. R., & Hibbs, N. (1995). Incremental validity of response latencies for detecting fakers on a personality test. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 362-372. doi:10.1006/jrpe.1995.1021
31. Holden, R. R., & Kroner, D. G. (1992). Relative efficacy of differential response latencies for detecting faking on a self-report measure of psychopathology. Psychological Assessment, 4, 170-173. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.2.170
32. Holden, R. R., Kroner, D. G., Fekken, G. C., & Popham, S. M. (1992). A model of personality test item response dissimulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 272-279. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.2.272
33. Holden, R. R., Wood, L. L., & Tomashewski, L. (2001). Do response time limitations counteract the effect of faking on personality inventory validity? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 160-169. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.160
34. Holtgraves, T. (2004). Social desirability and self-reports: Testing models of socially desirable responding. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 161-172. doi:10.1177/0146167203259930
35. Hough, L. M. (1998). Effects of intentional distortion in personality measurement and evaluation of suggested palliatives. Human Performance, 11, 209-244. doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1102&3_6
36. Hough, L. M., Eaton, N. K., Dunnette, M. D., Kamp, J. D., & McCloy, R. A. (1990). Criterion-related validities of personality constructs and the effect of response distortion on those validities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 581-595. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.75.5.581
37. Hsu, L. M., Santelli, J., & Hsu, J. R. (1989). Faking detection validity and incremental validity of response latencies to MMPI subtle and obvious items. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53, 278-295. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa5302_6
38. Isaacowitz, D. M. (2005). The gaze of the optimist. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 407-415. doi:10.1177/0146167204271599
39. Johnson, T., Kulesa, P., Cho, Y. I., & Shavitt, S. (2005). The relation between culture and response styles: Evidence from 19 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 264-277. doi:10.1177/0022022104272905
40. Komar, S., Brown, D. J., Komar, J. A., & Robie, C. (2008). Faking and the validity of conscientiousness: A Monte Carlo investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 140-154. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.140
41. Kuncel, N. R., & Tellegen, A. (2009). 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, 62, 201-228. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2009.01136.x
42. Lau, M. Y. (2007). Extreme response style: An empirical investigation of the effects of scale response format and fatigue (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Notre Dame, Indiana.
43. Li, A., & Bagger, J. (2006). Using the BIDR to distinguish the effects of impression management and self-deception on the criterion validity of personality measures: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 131-141. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00339.x
44. Liversedge, S. P., Rayner, K., White, S. J., Vergilino-Perez, D., Findlay, J. M., & Kentridge, R. W. (2004). Eye movements when reading disappearing text: Is there a gap effect in reading? Vision Research, 44, 1013-1024. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2003.12.002
45. McDaniel, M. A., & Timm, H. (1990). Lying takes time: Predicting deception in biodata using response latency. In H. C. Wing (Ed.), Alternative predictors. Boston, MA: Symposium presented at the 98th Annual Conference of the American Psychological Association.
46. McFarland, L. A., & Ryan, A. M. (2000). Variance in faking across noncognitive measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 812-821. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.812
47. McFarland, L. A., & Ryan, A. M. (2006). Toward an integrated model of applicant faking behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 979-1016. doi:10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00052.x
48. Naemi, B. D., Beal, D. J., & Payne, S. C. (2009). Personality predictors of extreme response style. Journal of Personality, 77, 261-286. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00545.x
49. Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1998). The effects of social desirability and faking on personality and integrity assessment for personnelselection. Human Performance, 11, 245-269. doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1102&3_7
50. Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Reiss, A. D. (1996). Role of social desirability in personality testing for personnel selection: The red herring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 660-679. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.660
51. Pieters, R., & Wedel, M. (2004). Attention capture and transfer in advertising: Brand, pictorial, and text-size effects. Journal of Marketing, 68, 36-50. doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.2.36.27794
52. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372
53. Rayner, K., Inhoff, A. W., Morrison, R. E., Slowiaczek, M. L., & Bertera, J. H. (1981). Masking of foveal and parafoveal vision during eye fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 167-179. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.7.1.167
54. R Development Core Team. (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
55. Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125-157. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.105.1.125
56. Rogers, T. B., Kuiper, N. A., & Kirker, W. S. (1977). Self-reference and the encoding of personal information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 677-688. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.35.9.677
57. Rosse, J. G., Stecher, M. D., Miller, J. L., & Levin, R. A. (1998). The impact of response distortion on preemployment personality testing and hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 634-644. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.83.4.634
58. Salvucci, D. D., & Goldberg, J. H. (2000). Identifying fixations and saccades in eye-tracking protocols. In Proceedings of the Eye Tracking Research and Applications Symposium (pp. 71-78). New York, NY: ACM Press.
59. Schmit, M. J., & Ryan, A. M. (1993). The Big Five in personnel selection: Factor structure in applicant and nonapplicant populations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 966-974. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.6.966
60. Smith, D. B., & Ellingson, J. E. (2002). Substance versus style: A new look at social desirability in motivating contexts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 211-219. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.211
61. Snell, A. F., Sydell, E. J., & Lueke, S. B. (1999). Towards a theory of applicant faking: Integrating studies of deception. Human Resource Management Review, 9, 219-242. doi:10.1016/S1053-4822(99)00019-4
62. Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Chan, K.-Y., Lee, W. C., & Drasgow, F. (2001). Effects of the testing situation on item responding: Cause for concern. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 943-953. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.943
63. Tourangeau, R., & Rasinski, K. A. (1988). Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 299-314. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.299
64. Van Iddekinge, C. H., Taylor, M. A., & Eidson, C. E. (2005). Broad versus narrow facets of integrity: Predictive validity and subgroup differences. Human Performance, 18, 151-177. doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1802_3
65. Vasilopoulos, N. L., Reilly, R. R., & Leaman, J. A. (2000). The influence of job familiarity and impression management on self-report measure scale scores and response latencies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 50-64. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.50
66. Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (1999). Meta-analyses of fakability estimates: Implications for personality measurement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 197-210. doi:10.1177/00131649921969802
67. Vrij, A., Edward, K., & Bull, R. (2001). Stereotypical verbal and nonverbal responses while deceiving others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 899-909. doi:10.1177/0146167201277012
68. Wanek, J. E., Sackett, P. R., & Ones, D. S. (2003). Towards an understanding of integrity test similarities and differences: An item-level analysis of seven tests. Personnel Psychology, 56, 873-894. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00243.x
69. Zickar, M. J., Gibby, R. E., & Robie, C. (2004). Uncovering faking samples in applicant, incumbent, and experimental data sets: An application of mixed-model item response theory. Organizational Research Methods, 7, 168-190. doi:10.1177/1094428104263674
70. Zickar, M. J., & Robie, C. (1999). Modeling faking good on personality items: An item-level analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 551-563. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.84.4.551
71. Zuckerman, M., DePaulo, B. M., & Rosenthal, R. (1981). Verbal and nonverbal communication of deception. In L. Berkowitz. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 1-59). New York, NY: Academic Press.