Cited by 51Psychological Testing and AssessmentPersonality Traits and PsychologyEmployer Branding and e-HRM

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Rules of Evidence and the Prevalence of Applicant Faking

Griffith, Richard L., Converse, Patrick D.·2011·New Perspectives on Faking in Personality Assessment

Abstract

This chapter addresses the longstanding question of “Do applicants fake?”. The authors discuss the nature of this question, a review of the relevant evidence, and an estimate of the degree to which faking on personality measures occurs in applicant contexts. Previous research has produced disparate answers to the question of whether applicants fake, with some researchers claiming the majority of applicants engage in the behavior and others suggesting the incidence of faking is negligible. In order to “prove” the existence of faking behavior, the authors use a metaphorical framework consisting of the forms of evidence often presented in a criminal trial to organize the diverse sources of evidence collected across numerous study designs. In addition, the authors present arguments that rule out alternative explanations for the outcomes of faking behavior. The data presented in this chapter suggest that on average 30% (+ or – 10%) of applicants engage in faking behavior.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195387476.003.0018

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 51

Metadata

Authors
Griffith, R. L., & Converse, P. D.
Venue
New Perspectives on Faking in Personality Assessment
Published
2011-08-22
Pages
34-52
OpenAlex
W2481247291
Cited by
51
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
21.09
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employer Branding and e-HRM
Keywords
applicant faking, personality assessment, evidence law, applicant screening, psychometric validity

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