Faking on self-report emotional intelligence and personality tests: Effects of faking opportunity, cognitive ability, and job type

Robert P. Tett, Kurt A. Freund, Neil D. Christiansen, Kevin E. Fox, John Coaster

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

40 Scopus citations

Abstract

We assessed the combined effects of cognitive ability, opportunity to fake, and trait job-relevance on faking self-report emotional intelligence and personality tests by having 150 undergraduates complete such tests honestly and then so as to appear ideal for one of three jobs: nurse practitioner, marketing manager, and computer programmer. Faking, as expected, was greater (a) in higher-g participants, (b) in those scoring lower under honest conditions (with greater opportunity to fake), and (c) on job-relevant traits. Predicted interactions accounted for additional unique variance in faking. Combining all three factors yielded a " perfect storm" standardized difference of around 2, more than double the overall .83 estimate. Implications for the study of faking are discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)195-201
Number of pages7
JournalPersonality and Individual Differences
Volume52
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2012

Keywords

  • Cognitive ability
  • Faking
  • Personality testing
  • Trait specificity
  • Trait-emotional intelligence
  • Trait-job-relevance

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Faking on self-report emotional intelligence and personality tests: Effects of faking opportunity, cognitive ability, and job type'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this