Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Psychology

Personnel Assessment and Decisions

Personality assessment

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Faking Is As Faking Does: A Rejoinder To Marcus (2021), Robert P. Tett, Daniel Simonet, Neil D. Christiansen Mar 2022

Faking Is As Faking Does: A Rejoinder To Marcus (2021), Robert P. Tett, Daniel Simonet, Neil D. Christiansen

Personnel Assessment and Decisions

Applicant faking poses serious threats to achieving personality-based fit, negatively affecting both the worker and the organization. In articulating this “faking-is-bad” (FIB) position, Tett and Simonet (2021) identify Marcus’ (2009) self-presentation theory (SPT) as representative of the contrarian “faking-is-good” camp by its advancement of self-presentation as beneficial in hiring contexts. In this rejoinder, we address 20 of Marcus’ (2021) claims in highlighting his reliance on an outdated empiricist rendering of validity, loosely justified rejection of the negative and moralistic “faking” label, disregard for the many challenges posed by blatant forms of faking, inattention to faking research supporting the FIB position, …


Applicant Faking On Personality Tests: Good Or Bad And Why Should We Care?, Robert P. Tett, Daniel V. Simonet May 2021

Applicant Faking On Personality Tests: Good Or Bad And Why Should We Care?, Robert P. Tett, Daniel V. Simonet

Personnel Assessment and Decisions

The unitarian understanding of construct validity holds that deliberate response distortion in completing self-report personality tests (i.e., faking) threatens trait-based inferences drawn from test scores. This “faking-is-bad” (FIB) perspective is being challenged by an emerging “faking-is-good” (FIG) position that condones or favors faking and its underlying attributes (e.g., social skill, ATIC) to the degree they contribute to predictor–criterion correlations and are job relevant. Based on the unitarian model of validity and relevant empirical evidence, we argue the FIG perspective is psychometrically flawed and counterproductive to personality-based selection targeting trait-based fit. Carrying forward both positions leads to variously dark futures for …