IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Overclaiming as a measure of faking

Listed author(s):
  • Bing, Mark N.
  • Kluemper, Don
  • Kristl Davison, H.
  • Taylor, Shannon
  • Novicevic, Milorad
Registered author(s):

    Researchers have recently asserted that popular measures of response distortion (i.e., socially desirable responding scales) lack construct validity (i.e., measure traits rather than test faking) and that applicant faking on personality tests remains a serious concern ([Griffith and Peterson, 2008] and [Holden, 2008]). Thus, although researchers and human resource (HR) selection specialists have been attempting to find measures which readily capture individual differences in faking that increase personality test validity, to date such attempts have rarely, if ever succeeded. The current study, however, finds that the overclaiming technique captures individual differences in faking and subsequently increases personality test score validity via suppressing unwanted error variance in personality test scores. Implications of this research on the overclaiming technique for improving HR selection decisions are illustrated and discussed.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.

    Volume (Year): 116 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 1 (September)
    Pages: 148-162

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:116:y:2011:i:1:p:148-162
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Fandt, Patricia M. & Ferris, Gerald R., 1990. "The management of information and impressions: When employees behave opportunistically," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 140-158, February.
    3. Hough, Leaetta M. & Oswald, Frederick L., 2008. "Personality Testing and Industrial–Organizational Psychology: Reflections, Progress, and Prospects," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(03), pages 272-290, September.
    4. Davison, H. Kristl & Bing, Mark N., 2009. "Content Validity Does Matter for the Criterion-Related Validity of Personality Tests," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(04), pages 501-503, December.
    5. Griffith, Richard L. & Peterson, Mitchell H., 2008. "The Failure of Social Desirability Measures to Capture Applicant Faking Behavior," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(03), pages 308-311, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:116:y:2011:i:1:p:148-162. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.