These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12002950)

  • 1. Substance versus style: a new look at social desirability in motivating contexts.
    Smith DB; Ellingson JE
    J Appl Psychol; 2002 Apr; 87(2):211-9. PubMed ID: 12002950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Correction for faking in self-report personality tests.
    Sjöberg L
    Scand J Psychol; 2015 Oct; 56(5):582-91. PubMed ID: 26043667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Applicant reactions and faking in real-life personnel selection.
    Honkaniemi L; Tolvanen A; Feldt T
    Scand J Psychol; 2011 Aug; 52(4):376-81. PubMed ID: 21752026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The relation between self-reported psychopathic traits and distorted response styles: a meta-analytic review.
    Ray JV; Hall J; Rivera-Hudson N; Poythress NG; Lilienfeld SO; Morano M
    Personal Disord; 2013 Jan; 4(1):1-14. PubMed ID: 22452779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The impact of social desirability on psychometric measures of aggression.
    Vigil-Colet A; Ruiz-Pamies M; Anguiano-Carrasco C; Lorenzo-Seva U
    Psicothema; 2012 May; 24(2):310-5. PubMed ID: 22420362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The relationship between the Marlowe-Crowne Form C and the validity scales of the MMPI.
    Robinette RL
    J Clin Psychol; 1991 May; 47(3):396-9. PubMed ID: 2066408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of impression management and self-deception on the predictive validity of personality constructs.
    Barrick MR; Mount MK
    J Appl Psychol; 1996 Jun; 81(3):261-72. PubMed ID: 8690688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Personnel selection and the five-factor model: reexamining the effects of appplicant's frame of reference.
    Smith DB; Hanges PJ; Dickson MW
    J Appl Psychol; 2001 Apr; 86(2):304-15. PubMed ID: 11393442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Less Evaluative Measures of Personality in Job Applicant Contexts: The Effect on Socially Desirable Responding and Criterion Validity.
    Wood JK; Anglim J; Horwood S
    J Pers Assess; 2024; 106(3):372-383. PubMed ID: 37703381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Detecting socially desirable responding with the Personality Assessment Inventory: the Positive Impression Management scale and the Defensiveness Index.
    Peebles J; Moore RJ
    J Clin Psychol; 1998 Aug; 54(5):621-8. PubMed ID: 9696112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Social Desirability in Intimate Partner Violence and Relationship Satisfaction Reports: An Exploratory Analysis.
    Visschers J; Jaspaert E; Vervaeke G
    J Interpers Violence; 2017 May; 32(9):1401-1420. PubMed ID: 26058978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Does multidimensional forced-choice prevent faking? Comparing the susceptibility of the multidimensional forced-choice format and the rating scale format to faking.
    Wetzel E; Frick S; Brown A
    Psychol Assess; 2021 Feb; 33(2):156-170. PubMed ID: 33151727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Nothing but the truth? Effects of faking on the validity of the crosswise model.
    Hoffmann A; Meisters J; Musch J
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(10):e0258603. PubMed ID: 34714838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Controlling social desirability may attenuate faking effects: a study with aggression measures.
    Anguiano-Carrasco C; Vigil-Colet A; Ferrando PJ
    Psicothema; 2013; 25(2):164-70. PubMed ID: 23628529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. APPLICANTS' STRATEGIC USE OF EXTREME OR MIDPOINT RESPONSES WHEN FAKING PERSONALITY TESTS.
    König CJ; Mura M; Schmidt J
    Psychol Rep; 2015 Oct; 117(2):429-36. PubMed ID: 26444843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Intentional response distortion on personality tests: using eye-tracking to understand response processes when faking.
    van Hooft EA; Born MP
    J Appl Psychol; 2012 Mar; 97(2):301-16. PubMed ID: 21967296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Retesting personality in employee selection: implications of the context, sample, and setting.
    Holladay CL; David E; Johnson SK
    Psychol Rep; 2013 Apr; 112(2):486-501. PubMed ID: 23833877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Using G-Theory to Enhance Evidence of Reliability and Validity for Common Uses of the Paulhus Deception Scales.
    Vispoel WP; Morris CA; Kilinc M
    Assessment; 2018 Jan; 25(1):69-83. PubMed ID: 27076506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Variance in faking across noncognitive measures.
    McFarland LA; Ryan AM
    J Appl Psychol; 2000 Oct; 85(5):812-21. PubMed ID: 11055152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Social desirability and sexual offenders: a review.
    Tan L; Grace RC
    Sex Abuse; 2008 Mar; 20(1):61-87. PubMed ID: 18420557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.