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 *

101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26444843)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 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 influence of item order on intentional response distortion in the assessment of high potentials: assessing pilot applicants.
    Khorramdel L; Kubinger KD; Uitz A
    Int J Psychol; 2014 Apr; 49(2):131-9. PubMed ID: 24811884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Testing the efficacy of a new procedure for reducing faking on personality tests within selection contexts.
    Fan J; Gao D; Carroll SA; Lopez FJ; Tian TS; Meng H
    J Appl Psychol; 2012 Jul; 97(4):866-80. PubMed ID: 22250667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Characteristics of successful fakers versus unsuccessful fakers: is empathy, intelligence, or personality associated with faking PTSD on the MMPI-2?
    Moyer DM; Gordon RM; Ward JT; Burkhardt BB
    Psychol Rep; 2006 Dec; 99(3):747-50. PubMed ID: 17305191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Socially desirable responding in Chinese university students: denial and enhancement?
    Li F; Li Y; Wang Y
    Psychol Rep; 2015 Apr; 116(2):409-21. PubMed ID: 25730746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Faking to fit in: Applicants' response strategies to match organizational culture.
    Roulin N; Krings F
    J Appl Psychol; 2020 Feb; 105(2):130-145. PubMed ID: 31233316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Applicant Faking of Personality Inventories in College Admission: Applicants' Shift From Honest Responses Is Unsystematic and Related to the Perceived Relevance for the Profession.
    Krammer G
    J Pers Assess; 2020; 102(6):758-769. PubMed ID: 31403324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Response latencies are alive and well for identifying fakers on a self-report personality inventory: A reconsideration of van Hooft and Born (2012).
    Holden RR; Lambert CE
    Behav Res Methods; 2015 Dec; 47(4):1436-1442. PubMed ID: 25381021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.