The Effects of Social Desirability and Faking on Personality and Integrity Assessment for Personnel Selection
Abstract
A review of the extant literature and new empirical research suggests that social desirability is not much of a concern in personality and integrity testing for personnel selection. In particular, based on meta-analytically derived evidence, it appears that social desirability influences do not destroy the convergent and discriminant validity of the Big Five dimensions of personality (Emotional Stability, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness). We also present new empirical evidence regarding gender and age differences in socially desirable re- sponding. Although social desirability predicts a number of important work variables such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and supervisor ratings of training success, social desirability does not seem to be a predictor of overall job performance and is only very weakly related to specific dimensions of job performance such as technical proficiency (r = -.07) and personal discipline ( r = .05). Large sample investigations of the moderating influences of social desirability in actual work settings indicate that social desirability does not moderate the criterion-related validities of personality variables or integrity tests. The criterion-related validity of integrity tests for overall job performance with applicant samples in predictive studies is .41. Controlling for social desirability in integrity or personality test scores leaves the operational validities intact, thereby suggesting that social desirability functions neither as a mediator nor as a suppressor variable in personality-performance.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Some evidence suggests that faking has a surprisingly minimal effect on predicting job performance.
“Some evidence suggests that faking has a surprisingly minimal effect on predicting job performance.”
From Personality Psychology and Economics (2011) · cites this paper as Ones and Viswesvaran [1998]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 40 · Cited by 294
- Authors
- Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C.
- Affiliations
- Florida International University (US)
- Venue
- Human Performance
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1998-06
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2-3
- Pages
- 245-269
- ISSN
- 0895-9285 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7043
- OpenAlex
- W1985967431
- Cited by
- 294
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 23
- FWCI
- 4.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Human Performance (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employer Branding and e-HRM
- Keywords
- social desirability, faking, personality assessment, integrity testing, personnel selection, Big Five personality traits, convergent and discriminant validity, criterion validity, employee performance, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, gender differences, age differences, moderator effects, suppressor variables
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review