Researchers and practitioners continue to be concerned about the magnitude, extent, and effects of response distortion when self-report personality measures are used in high-stakes testing. One method for mitigating response distortion that has not received much empirical attention is profile matching. Profile matching assesses the fit between test-takers’ predictor profiles and a standard profile which represents an ideal or high performing employee’s profile. Since profile matching assesses fit, it can capture nonlinear effects. Furthermore, high predictor scores are not necessarily associated with higher criterion scores. Test–takers who distort their responses by choosing inaccurately extreme response options may improve their chances of being hired if a linear model is used, but this approach is unlikely to be effective if a profile matching strategy is used as long as the standard profile is unknown to the test-takers. As such, the primary objective of the present study was to examine the extent to which profile matching may alleviate concerns about response distortion. A secondary objective was to examine characteristics of the standard profile that are associated with the efficacy of this approach. The present study compared the effects of response distortion on personality test scores, and their criterion-related validity in predicting tenure, based on a linear composite and a profile fit score. The present study used data from 996 applicants who completed a personality test in a high-stakes testing context. Missing data were imputed for a subset of applicants who did not complete two response distortion scales. As such, the results provided an initial proof-of-concept of the effectiveness of profile matching as a personnel decision-making strategy using a blend of real and simulated data. The results suggest that profile fit scores are less related to response distortion and display higher criterion-related validity than linear composite scores. However, the difference in criterion-related validity could not be attributed to response distortion. The results further suggest that the amount of scatter in the standard profile is negatively associated with the profile fit score’s susceptibility to response distortion and positively related to criterion-related validity.

One of the fundamental underlying assumptions of selection procedures is that the information gathered from applicants is accurate, and thus, will predict performance on the job (Donovan, Dwight, & Schneider, 2014; Schmitt & Sinha, 2011). As self-report instruments such as paper-and-pencil tests and unsupervised online surveys become more prevalent in organizational selection contexts (Truxillo & Bauer, 2011) due to ease of use and cost efficiency, the concern of applicants faking responses to inaccurately portray themselves as more highly desirable is increasingly critical (Hough, Oswald, & Ployhart, 2001). Depending on the exact magnitude of the particular selection event, this compromise of validity may cost an organization just as much as they stand to gain from an accurate self-report selection tool. The aim of this study is to test the viability of a video game platform designed to aid personnel selection by reducing faking. This thesis first outlines the most widely assessed predictors of job performance and briefly review the state-of-the-science of personality research in the context of employee selection. Then, a review of faking, drawing upon a model of faking proposed by McFarland & Ryan (2000), describes the impact it has on employee selection based on personality tests. Drawing upon Malone’s (1981) theory of intrinsic motivation as well as Sweller’s (1994) theory of cognitive load, I proposed the use of a video game platform as a counter-measure to faking selection assessments. Results suggest that participants are less able to fake personality assessments when assessed via video games as compared to online surveys.

This study examined test-taking attitudes and response distortion on a personality test. Consistent with our hypotheses, applicants were found to have significantly more positive test-taking attitudes and exhibit a greater degree of response distortion as compared to incumbents. In addition, test-taking attitudes were significantly associated with response distortion. However, test-taking attitudes failed to affect work performance or validity in the incumbent sample. Limitations and implications for future research are discussed. / Ph. D.

The use of unproctored internet-based testing for employee selection is widespread. Although this mode of testing has advantages over onsite testing, researchers and practitioners continue to be concerned about potential malfeasance (e.g., cheating and response distortion) under high-stakes conditions. Therefore, the primary objective of the present study was to investigate potential malfeasance effects on the scores of an unproctored internet-based cognitive ability, and a personality test. This was accomplished by implementing a within-subjects design in which test takers first completed the tests as job applicants (high-stakes) or incumbents (low-stakes) then as research participants (low-stakes). The pattern of cognitive ability test score differences was more consonant with a psychometric practice effect than a malfeasance explanation. Thus, the results suggest that, if present, there was no evidence to indicate that wide- scale or systematic malfeasance unduly affected the test scores. This may have been due to the speeded nature of the test, which was used to preempt the potential for widespread cheating. Additionally, the unproctored personality administration resulted in similar mean shifts and similar proportions of test takers being suspected of distorting their responses as that reported in the extant literature for proctored tests. In their totality, these results suggest that an unproctored internet-based administration does not uniquely threaten personality measures in terms of elevated levels of response distortion compared to proctored measures.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the personality trait elevation between honest and applicant contexts that has been widely seen throughout the personality and selection research is merely universal, blatant trait elevation, or whether something else is underlying this faking behavior. By obtaining both honest and applicant context personality responses in which respondents were provided with focal job knowledge, this study determined that while there is near-universal trait elevation across seven personality traits, there is, in fact, some trait differentiation between jobs. As such, this study provided some evidence of knowledgeable faking, defined as distortion of personality test responses based on knowledge of the job being applied to, within applicant contexts.

Personality tests are often utilized in employment selection. Their wide use may be attributed to various studies which suggest that personality is related to job performance. Although personality is widely utilized in various assessment contexts including but not limited to personnel selection settings, both researcher and practitioners continue to criticize the use of measures due to faking behavior or response distortion. Furthermore, these criticisms are warranted because laboratory studies have consistently found that when instructed, respondents are able to alter their scores in order to appear more desirable. Additionally, there is also conforming evidence from field studies which suggest that 20 - 30% of real-world applicants fake in order to gain a competitive advantage in being hired. Faking studies generally define successful faking as the obtainment of the highest scores possible. This study used a recent and alternative conceptualization of successful faking. More specifically, faking is defined as successful if an applicant is able to match his or her responses on a personality test to the perception of what subject matter experts would consider critical traits for success to that job. Psychology and Business students were assigned to an `honest' or `faking' condition and asked to complete a personality test. Students in the honest condition were instructed to describe themselves honest, while students in the faking condition were instructed to describe themselves in the context of applying for a fictional customer service representative position. Additionally, all students completed a measure of emotional intelligence and cognitive ability. Subject matter experts were then surveyed on what they thought was the ideal characteristics for the fictitious position. This study found that business students who were given instructions to fake were able to fake better (obtain a greater match) than psychology students instructed to fake. Furthermore, individual characteristics such as job familiarity, cognitive ability, and emotional intelligence were examined in relation to faking success. Results indicated that only emotional intelligence was predictive of similarity. Moreover, the subscales of use of emotions and regulation of emotions were predicative of similarity. Finally, the limitations of the study and implications of results are presented and discussed further.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Although not universally accepted, much of the field has converged upon the Five Factor Model (FFM) of personality as constituting a comprehensive taxonomy of normal personality functioning. A weakness common to all personality inventories is excessive length, which can result in examinee fatigue, and ultimately, poor data quality. Computer adaptive testing offers a solution to the test fatigue problem by administering only the items that are informative for that examinee on a given scale. A new test based upon the FFM of normal personality administered in a computer adaptive fashion was constructed. Reliability and validity evidence were obtained, with favorable results. New approaches to the detection of intentional response distortion were explored with mixed results including some promising findings in need of cross-validation. Response latencies were able to discriminate between honest and faking subjects, but the findings were unable to clarify the issue of whether faking is an easier or more laborious cognitive process than honest answering. New directions in computer adaptive personality testing research are proposed. / Ph. D.