Cited by 294Personality Traits and PsychologyPsychological Testing and AssessmentEmployer Branding and e-HRM

The Effects of Social Desirability and Faking on Personality and Integrity Assessment for Personnel Selection

Ones, Deniz S., Viswesvaran, Chockalingam·1998·Human Performance

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

Crossref · 10.1080/08959285.1998.9668033

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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
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