135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23833877)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Overt honesty measures predicting admissions: an index of validity or reliability.
Nicol AA; Paunonen SV
Psychol Rep; 2002 Feb; 90(1):105-15. PubMed ID: 11899917
[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. 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]
9. Retesting after initial failure, coaching rumors, and warnings against faking in online personality measures for selection.
Landers RN; Sackett PR; Tuzinski KA
J Appl Psychol; 2011 Jan; 96(1):202-10. PubMed ID: 20718510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Note on concurrent validation of the personality assessment inventory in law enforcement.
Hays JR
Psychol Rep; 1997 Aug; 81(1):244-6. PubMed ID: 9293213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Self-presentation dynamics on overt integrity tests: experimental studies of the Reid Report.
Cunningham MR; Wong DT; Barbee AP
J Appl Psychol; 1994 Oct; 79(5):643-58. PubMed ID: 7989274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The relationship between the FFM and personality disorders in a personnel selection sample.
Nederström M; Furnham A
Scand J Psychol; 2012 Oct; 53(5):421-9. PubMed ID: 22882662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Liar! Liar! (when stakes are higher): Understanding how the overclaiming technique can be used to measure faking in personnel selection.
Dunlop PD; Bourdage JS; de Vries RE; McNeill IM; Jorritsma K; Orchard M; Austen T; Baines T; Choe WK
J Appl Psychol; 2020 Aug; 105(8):784-799. PubMed ID: 31714104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. TEMPS-A[p] temperament profile related to professional choice: A study in 1548 applicants to become a cadet officer in the Italian air force.
Maremmani I; Dell'Osso L; Rovai L; Pacini M; Arduino G; Montagnari A; Abbenante D; Maremmani AG; Giulio P; Akiskal K; Akiskal H
J Affect Disord; 2010 Aug; 124(3):314-8. PubMed ID: 20417972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Demand effects on positive response distortion by police officer applicants on the Revised NEO Personality Inventory.
Detrick P; Chibnall JT; Call C
J Pers Assess; 2010 Sep; 92(5):410-5. PubMed ID: 20706927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Eysenck personality inventory: impulsivity/neuroticism and social desirability response set.
Kumari V
Psychol Rep; 1996 Feb; 78(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 8839293
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Pre-employment integrity testing across multiple industries.
Fine S
Psychol Rep; 2010 Oct; 107(2):607-10. PubMed ID: 21117489
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
