How effective are people at faking on personality questionnaires

By B. Martin, Chieh-Chen Bowen, S. T. Hunt. 2002

120 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Reconsidering Forced-Choice Item Formats for Applicant Personality Assessment (2005, methodology): “A final limitation to note is that the method of assessing IJT used in this study, as well as past approaches to measuring the ideal job profiles used in the past (e.g., Martin et al., 2002), may not be optimal.”
Situational Judgment Tests and their Predictiveness of College Students’ Success: The Influence of Faking (2005, background): “One stream of faking research (e.g., Cowles, Darling, & Skanes, 1992; Martin et al., 2002; Zickar & Robie, 1999) involves experimental studies comparing responses obtained under different instruction sets (instructions to be honest or to fake good).”
The use of personality measures in personnel selection: What does current research support? (2006, background): “Martin, Bowen, and Hunt (2002) were also able to show that a new forced-choice personality scale was resistant to the shift in scores that usually accompanies fake–good instructions.”
A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Job Applicant Faking on Personality Measures (2006, unknown): “Thus, the results of this investigation are consistent with results from induced-faking studies (Furnham, 1990; Mahar et al., 1995; Martin et al., 2002) and with the position that applicants identify the personality characteristics that appear especially relevant to the job for which they are applyi”