171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31714104)
1. 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]
2. Children overclaim more knowledge than adults do, but for different reasons.
Butler JR; Nelson NL
J Exp Child Psychol; 2021 Jan; 201():104969. PubMed ID: 32916594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Does the Over-Claiming Questionnaire measure overclaiming? Absent convergent validity in a large community sample.
Ludeke SG; Makransky G
Psychol Assess; 2016 Jun; 28(6):765-74. PubMed ID: 26372263
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Does forcing reduce faking? A meta-analytic review of forced-choice personality measures in high-stakes situations.
Cao M; Drasgow F
J Appl Psychol; 2019 Nov; 104(11):1347-1368. PubMed ID: 31070382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Teasing Apart Overclaiming, Overconfidence, and Socially Desirable Responding.
Bensch D; Paulhus DL; Stankov L; Ziegler M
Assessment; 2019 Apr; 26(3):351-363. PubMed ID: 28355929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. Openness to (reporting) experiences that one never had: Overclaiming as an outcome of the knowledge accumulated through a proclivity for cognitive and aesthetic exploration.
Dunlop PD; Bourdage JS; de Vries RE; Hilbig BE; Zettler I; Ludeke SG
J Pers Soc Psychol; 2017 Nov; 113(5):810-834. PubMed ID: 27454925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. True virtue, self-presentation, or both?: A behavioral test of impression management and overclaiming.
Müller S; Moshagen M
Psychol Assess; 2019 Feb; 31(2):181-191. PubMed ID: 30299118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effects of the testing situation on item responding: cause for concern.
Stark S; Chernyshenko OS; Chan KY; Lee WC; Drasgow F
J Appl Psychol; 2001 Oct; 86(5):943-53. PubMed ID: 11596810
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Overclaiming is not related to dark triad personality traits or stated and revealed risk preferences.
Keller L; Bieleke M; Koppe KM; Gollwitzer PM
PLoS One; 2021; 16(8):e0255207. PubMed ID: 34339425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
