IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intell/v81y2020ics0160289620300489.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing competing claims about overclaiming

Author

Listed:
  • Goecke, B.
  • Weiss, S.
  • Steger, D.
  • Schroeders, U.
  • Wilhelm, O.

Abstract

Overclaiming has been described as people's tendency to overestimate their cognitive abilities in general and their knowledge in particular. We discuss four different perspectives on the phenomenon of overclaiming that have been proposed in the research literature: Overclaiming as a result of a) self-enhancement tendencies, b) as a cognitive bias (e.g., hindsight bias, memory bias), c) as proxy for cognitive abilities, and d) as sign of creative engagement. Moreover, we discuss two different scoring methods for an OCQ (signal detection theory vs. familiarity ratings). To distinguish between the different viewpoints of what overclaiming is, we juxtaposed overclaiming, as indicated by claiming familiarity with non-existent terms, with fluid and crystallized intelligence, self-reported knowledge, creativity, faking ability, and personality. Overclaiming was measured with a newly comprised overclaiming questionnaire. Results of several latent variable analyses based upon a multivariate study with 298 participants were: First, overclaiming is neither predicted by honesty-humility nor faking ability and therefore reflects something different than mere self-enhancement tendencies. Second, overclaiming is not predicted by crystallized intelligence, but is highly predictive of self-reported knowledge and, thus, not suitable as an index or a proxy for cognitive abilities. Finally, overclaiming is neither related to divergent thinking and originality, and only moderately predicted by self-reported openness creativity from the HEXACO which means that overclaiming does not reflect creative ability. In sum, our results favor an interpretation of overclaiming as a phenomenon that requires more than self-enhancement motivation, in contrast to the claim that was initially proposed in the literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Goecke, B. & Weiss, S. & Steger, D. & Schroeders, U. & Wilhelm, O., 2020. "Testing competing claims about overclaiming," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:81:y:2020:i:c:s0160289620300489
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2020.101470
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289620300489
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intell.2020.101470?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steger, Diana & Schroeders, Ulrich & Wilhelm, Oliver, 2019. "On the dimensionality of crystallized intelligence: A smartphone-based assessment," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 76-85.
    2. Bing, Mark N. & Kluemper, Don & Kristl Davison, H. & Taylor, Shannon & Novicevic, Milorad, 2011. "Overclaiming as a measure of faking," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 148-162, September.
    3. Rosseel, Yves, 2012. "lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i02).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hartung, Johanna & Goecke, Benjamin & Schroeders, Ulrich & Schmitz, Florian & Wilhelm, Oliver, 2022. "Latin square tasks: A multi-study evaluation," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sonia Nawrocka & Hans De Witte & Margherita Pasini & Margherita Brondino, 2023. "A Person-Centered Approach to Job Insecurity: Is There a Reciprocal Relationship between the Quantitative and Qualitative Dimensions of Job Insecurity?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(7), pages 1-27, March.
    2. Md. Mominur Rahman & Bilkis Akhter, 2021. "The impact of investment in human capital on bank performance: evidence from Bangladesh," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-13, December.
    3. Masashi Soga & Kevin J. Gaston & Yuichi Yamaura & Kiyo Kurisu & Keisuke Hanaki, 2016. "Both Direct and Vicarious Experiences of Nature Affect Children’s Willingness to Conserve Biodiversity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-12, May.
    4. César Merino-Soto & Gina Chávez-Ventura & Verónica López-Fernández & Guillermo M. Chans & Filiberto Toledano-Toledano, 2022. "Learning Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-L): Psychometric and Measurement Invariance Evidence in Peruvian Undergraduate Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-17, September.
    5. Nathaniel Oliver Iotti & Damiano Menin & Tomas Jungert, 2022. "Early Adolescents’ Motivations to Defend Victims of Cyberbullying," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-9, July.
    6. Sweldens, Steven & Puntoni, Stefano & Paolacci, Gabriele & Vissers, Maarten, 2014. "The bias in the bias: Comparative optimism as a function of event social undesirability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 229-244.
    7. Peter Tavel & Bibiana Jozefiakova & Peter Telicak & Jana Furstova & Michal Puza & Natalia Kascakova, 2022. "Psychometric Analysis of the Shortened Version of the Spiritual Well-Being Scale on the Slovak Population (SWBS-Sk)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-12, January.
    8. Allen, Jaime & Eboli, Laura & Forciniti, Carmen & Mazzulla, Gabriella & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios, 2019. "The role of critical incidents and involvement in transit satisfaction and loyalty," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 57-69.
    9. Andreea-Ionela Puiu & Anca Monica Ardeleanu & Camelia Cojocaru & Anca Bratu, 2021. "Exploring the Effect of Status Quo, Innovativeness, and Involvement Tendencies on Luxury Fashion Innovations: The Mediation Role of Status Consumption," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, May.
    10. Andres Trujillo-Barrera & Joost M. E. Pennings & Dianne Hofenk, 2016. "Understanding producers' motives for adopting sustainable practices: the role of expected rewards, risk perception and risk tolerance," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(3), pages 359-382.
    11. Daria J. Kuss & Lydia Harkin & Eiman Kanjo & Joel Billieux, 2018. "Problematic Smartphone Use: Investigating Contemporary Experiences Using a Convergent Design," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, January.
    12. Allen, Jaime & Muñoz, Juan Carlos & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios, 2019. "On evasion behaviour in public transport: Dissatisfaction or contagion?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 626-651.
    13. Cloarec, Julien, 2022. "Privacy controls as an information source to reduce data poisoning in artificial intelligence-powered personalization," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 144-153.
    14. Merkle, Edgar C. & Steyvers, Mark & Mellers, Barbara & Tetlock, Philip E., 2017. "A neglected dimension of good forecasting judgment: The questions we choose also matter," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 817-832.
    15. Sai-fu Fung & Esther Oi-wah Chow & Chau-kiu Cheung, 2020. "Development and Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of a Brief Wisdom Development Scale," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-14, April.
    16. Dang Vu, Hoai Nam & Nielsen, Martin Reinhardt, 2022. "Understanding determinants of the intention to buy rhino horn in Vietnam through the Theory of Planned Behaviour and the Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    17. Tahani Z. Aldahdouh & Petri Nokelainen & Vesa Korhonen, 2020. "Technology and Social Media Usage in Higher Education: The Influence of Individual Innovativeness," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440198, January.
    18. Georges Steffgen & Philipp E. Sischka & Martha Fernandez de Henestrosa, 2020. "The Quality of Work Index and the Quality of Employment Index: A Multidimensional Approach of Job Quality and Its Links to Well-Being at Work," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-31, October.
    19. Zaitun Mohd Saman & Ab Hamid Siti-Azrin & Azizah Othman & Yee Cheng Kueh, 2021. "The Validity and Reliability of the Malay Version of the Cyberbullying Scale among Secondary School Adolescents in Malaysia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-12, November.
    20. Esef Hakan Toytok & Sungur Gürel, 2019. "Does Project Children’s University Increase Academic Self-Efficacy in 6th Graders? A Weak Experimental Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-12, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:81:y:2020:i:c:s0160289620300489. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.