Do applicants fake? An examination of the frequency of applicant faking behavior
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this article is to empirically test whether applicants fake their responses to personality based employment inventories. Design/methodology/approach This study utilized a within subjects design to asses whether applicants elevated their scores in an applicant conditions. Subjects who applied for a job were later contacted and asked to complete the same personality measure under an honest instructional set. The within subjects design allowed the researcher to examine faking behavior at the individual level of analysis rather than draw inferences between applicant and incumbent groups. Findings Results suggest that a significant number of applicants do fake personality based selection measures. Depending on the confidence interval used between 30 and 50 percent of applicants elevated their scores when applying for a job. The results also show that applicant faking behavior resulted in significant rank ordering changes that impacted hiring decisions. Research limitations/implications One limitation of the study is the exclusion of a job performance criterion measure. Without this measure definitive statements regarding the decay in the criterion validity of the measure cannot be made. While the study demonstrated rank ordering changes, decrements in criterion validity cannot be demonstrated without measuring job performance. Practical implications The practical implications of the paper are that personality measures should not be used alone. Rather they sh…
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?
In Griffith et al. (2007), significant within-person differences existed between mean level scores in the applicant condition and mean level scores in the honest condition, F(2,59)=42.32, p<0.001.
“The researchers found a significant difference between responses across the two conditions: Significant within-person differences existed between mean level scores in the applicant condition and mean level scores in the honest condition, F (2, 59) = 42.32, p < 0.001, suggesting that people can and do intentionally alter their responses in an effort to portray themselves in a more positive light”
From Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions (2016) · cites this paper as R. L. Griffith, Chmielowski, and Yoshita (2007)
Cites
Personality measurement and employment decisions: Questions and answers.
Hogan, R., Hogan, J., & Roberts, B. W. (1996) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.51.5.469 · Cited by 572 · see citing works
Variance in faking across noncognitive measures.
McFarland, L. A., & Ryan, A. M. (2000) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.812 · Cited by 410 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions
Griffith, R. L., Wolfeld, L., Armon, B. K., Rios, J., & Liu, O. L. (2016) · ETS Research Report Series · doi:10.1002/ets2.12112 · Cited by 211 · see citing works
Self-citationKrammer, G., Sommer, M., & Arendasy, M. E. (2017) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2017.1285781 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
“This distortion was in line with previous studies (e.g., Ellingson et al., 1999; Griffith et al., 2007), and showed that the rank-order could be completely distorted (r D .019), but was at its highest still only modestly preserved (r D .395).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialMartínez, A., Salgado, J. F., & Lado, M. (2022) · Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones · doi:10.5093/jwop2022a16 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Griffith, R. L., Chmielowski, T., & Yoshita, Y.
- Affiliations
- Florida Institute of Technology (US)
- ORCID
- Griffith, Richard L.
- Venue
- Personnel Review
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2007-04-17
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 341-355
- ISSN
- 0048-3486 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2085858247
- Cited by
- 240
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 12.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Personnel Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employer Branding and e-HRM
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- applicant faking, personality tests, hiring decisions, criterion validity, test battery
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