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 *

233 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21526598)

  • 1. Deliberate faking on personality and emotional intelligence measures.
    Hartman NS; Grubb WL
    Psychol Rep; 2011 Feb; 108(1):120-38. PubMed ID: 21526598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Faking and the validity of conscientiousness: a Monte Carlo investigation.
    Komar S; Brown DJ; Komar JA; Robie C
    J Appl Psychol; 2008 Jan; 93(1):140-54. PubMed ID: 18211141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Individual differences in faking integrity tests.
    Brown RD; Cothern CM
    Psychol Rep; 2002 Dec; 91(3 Pt 1):691-702. PubMed ID: 12530710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessing personality with a structured employment interview: construct-related validity and susceptibility to response inflation.
    Van Iddekinge CH; Raymark PH; Roth PL
    J Appl Psychol; 2005 May; 90(3):536-52. PubMed ID: 15910148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Examining faking on personality inventories using unfolding item response theory models.
    Scherbaum CA; Sabet J; Kern MJ; Agnello P
    J Pers Assess; 2013; 95(2):207-16. PubMed ID: 23030769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Item placement on a personality measure: effects on faking behavior and test measurement properties.
    McFarland LA; Ryan AM; Ellis A
    J Pers Assess; 2002 Apr; 78(2):348-69. PubMed ID: 12067198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Psychometric characteristics of the Emotional Quotient Inventory, Youth Version, Short Form, in Hungarian high school students.
    Kun B; Urbán R; Paksi B; Csóbor LV; Oláh A; Demetrovics Z
    Psychol Assess; 2012 Jun; 24(2):518-23. PubMed ID: 22004539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effect of symptom information and intelligence in dissimulation: an examination of faking response styles by inmates on the Basic Personality Inventory.
    Steffan JS; Kroner DG; Morgan RD
    Assessment; 2007 Mar; 14(1):22-34. PubMed ID: 17314177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The Psychometric Costs of Applicants' Faking: Examining Measurement Invariance and Retest Correlations Across Response Conditions.
    Krammer G; Sommer M; Arendasy ME
    J Pers Assess; 2017; 99(5):510-523. PubMed ID: 28300431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. The nature of faking: A homogeneous and predictable construct?
    Bensch D; Maaß U; Greiff S; Horstmann KT; Ziegler M
    Psychol Assess; 2019 Apr; 31(4):532-544. PubMed ID: 30869958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The detection of faking on the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI).
    Van Gorp WG; Meyer RG
    J Clin Psychol; 1986 Sep; 42(5):742-7. PubMed ID: 3760205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Toward a brief multidimensional assessment of emotional intelligence: psychometric properties of the Emotional Quotient Inventory-Short Form.
    Parker JD; Keefer KV; Wood LM
    Psychol Assess; 2011 Sep; 23(3):762-77. PubMed ID: 21500919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Five Factor Biodata Inventory: resistance to faking.
    Sisco H; Reilly RR
    Psychol Rep; 2007 Aug; 101(1):3-17. PubMed ID: 17958100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Emotional Intelligence and Nurse Recruitment: Rasch and confirmatory factor analysis of the trait emotional intelligence questionnaire short form.
    Snowden A; Watson R; Stenhouse R; Hale C
    J Adv Nurs; 2015 Dec; 71(12):2936-49. PubMed ID: 26265433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.