The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Failure of Social Desirability Measures to Capture Applicant Faking Behavior
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
The operational quality of a measure of social desirability as a proxy for faking was poor (between .08 and .11).
“Using the proxy variable estimation suggested by J. E. Hunter and Schmidt (2004), R. L. Griffith and Peterson (2008) reported that the operational quality of a measure of social desirability as a proxy for faking was poor (interpreted similarly to a corrected correlation coefficient, between .08 and .11).”
From Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions (2016) · cites this paper as R. L. Griffith and Peterson (2008)
People can and do intentionally alter their responses to portray themselves more positively when motivated.
“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 & Peterson, 2008
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Johnson, 2006, A closer examination of applicant faking behavior, 209
- 10.4135/9781412985031 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1108/00483480710731310 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1754-9434.2008.00048.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00383.x · DOI
- 10.1037/e518442013-101 · DOI
- Griffith, 2006, A closer examination of applicant faking behavior, 149
- 10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.613 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.348 · DOI
- Burns, 2006, A closer examination of applicant faking behavior, 113
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kreitchmann, R. S., Abad, F. J., Ponsoda, V., Nieto, M. D., & Morillo, D. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02309 · Cited by 269
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
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Griffith, R. L., & Peterson, M. H.
- Affiliations
- Florida Institute of Technology (US)
- Corresponding author
- Griffith, Richard L.
- ORCID
- Griffith, Richard L.
- Venue
- Industrial and Organizational Psychology
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2008-09
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 308-311
- ISSN
- 1754-9426 (ISSN-L)
- 1754-9434
- OpenAlex
- W2109413822
- Cited by
- 87
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 6.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Industrial and Organizational Psychology (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- 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
- applicant faking, social desirability, personality assessment, applicant screening
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
