Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information Leadership, Fifth Edition

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Organizational Research Methods
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zickar, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Robie, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Uncovering Faking Samples in Applicant, Incumbent, and Experimental Data Sets: An Application of Mixed-Model Item Response Theory

Michael J. Zickar

Bowling Green State University

Robert E. Gibby

Bowling Green State University

Chet Robie

Wilfrid Laurier University

Most research on faking personality inventories has assumed that individuals are either faking or responding honestly; distinctions within these two groups are generally not made. A recently developed statistical technique, mixed-model item response theory, was used to identify subgroups within samples of individuals taking two different personality inventories under various conditions. For one personality test, the authors obtained a sample of applicants and incumbents. For the second test, a sample of honest respondents and two samples of respondents instructed to fake (coached and ad lib) were obtained. Across the applicant and incumbent data sets, the authors generally found that three classes were needed to model all response patterns. In the experimental faking study, an honest class and an extreme faking class were needed to model the data. Overall, these results demonstrate that previous assumptions about the nature of faking on personality inventories have been too restrictive.

Key Words: item response theory • personality measurement • faking • response distortion • mixed-model item analysis

Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 7, No. 2, 168-190 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1094428104263674
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
A. M. Maij-de Meij, H. Kelderman, and H. van der Flier
Fitting a Mixture Item Response Theory Model to Personality Questionnaire Data: Characterizing Latent Classes and Investigating Possibilities for Improving Prediction
Applied Psychological Measurement, November 1, 2008; 32(8): 611 - 631.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
W. H. M. Emons
Nonparametric Person-Fit Analysis of Polytomous Item Scores
Applied Psychological Measurement, May 1, 2008; 32(3): 224 - 247.
[Abstract] [PDF]