Social desirable responding: The evolution of a construct
By D. Paulhus. 2002
318 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/77afcd6108af34b5058844153aae5a5898273455
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- Jan-Benedict E M Steenkamp
- Martijn G. de Jong
- Henri Kuokkanen
- William Sun
- Jeffrey A Greene
- Sean M. Laurent
- Mitchell G. Rothstein
- H. Baumgartner
Citations in the corpus
- Companies, Meet Ethical Consumers: Strategic CSR Management to Impact Consumer Choice (2019, methodology): “Following Steenkamp et al. (2010), 12 attitudinal questions on SD bias were taken from Paulhus’ (2002) moralistic response tendencies scale.”
- The Wisdom Development Scale: Translating the Conceptual to the Concrete (2006, background): “Future administrations of the WDS should continue to examine the potential impact of sociallydesirable responding and perhaps utilize principal factor deletion when creating wisdom total scores (Paulhus, 2002).”
- Teacher Personality and Teacher Effectiveness in Secondary School: Personality Predicts Teacher Support and Student Self-Efficacy but Not Academic Achievement (2017, background): “Socially desirable responding is a common explanation given for this, whereby one enhances their reports of socially desirable qualities and hides their socially undesirable qualities (Paulhus, 2002).”
- Effects of faking on self-deception and impression management scales (2004, background): “Finally, in a recent paper Paulhus (2002) admits that both SDE and IM scores could be manipulated when the scales are combined with appropriate instructions (unpublished data), which would imply that not only IM but also SDE scores are susceptible to conscious distortion.”
- Gender Roles and Empathic Accuracy: The Role of Communion in Reading Minds (2009, background): “, communion)—in fact, the impression management scale in the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding by Paulhus (1984, 1991) has also been labeled the Communion Management scale (Paulhus 2002), and correlates positively with a measure of communal bias (i.”