The Failure of Social Desirability Measures to Capture Applicant Faking Behavior

By Richard L. Griffith, Mitchell H. Peterson. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2008

86 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1d09b9d58099430609e1518eaf301f11dea5d251

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. Richard L. Griffith

In Social Psychology

1. Richard L. Griffith
2. Mitchell H. Peterson
3. Matthew S. O’Connell
4. Phillip M. Mangos
5. Donald H. Kluemper
6. Joshua A. Isaacson

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Mitchell H. Peterson
2. Matthew S. O’Connell
3. Phillip M. Mangos
4. Joshua A. Isaacson
5. Richard L. Griffith
6. Donald H. Kluemper

Citations in the corpus

• Applicant Faking, Social Desirability, and the Prediction of Counterproductive Work Behaviors (2011, methodology): “…use of SD scales to identify or correct for response distortion has been questioned in terms of both its methodological soundness (e.g., Burns & Christiansen, 2006; Griffith & Peterson, 2008; Smith & Ellingson, 2002) and its usefulness in improving selection outcomes (e.g., Schmitt & Oswald, 2006).”
• Future employment selection methods: evaluating social networking web sites (2009, background): “, 2007; Tett and Christiansen, 2007) and Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Hough and Oswald, 2008; Griffith and Peterson, 2008) have focused on the limited criterion validity of self-reported personality measures as well as the complex issue of social desirability and faking of self-reported”