Examining dishonesty in the job application process: Relationships with social desirability, personality, and deviant behaviour.

摘要

The ease and frequency with which job applicants can distort their responses to noncognitive tests (i.e., "fake") is a source of concern for personnel selection practitioners and researchers alike. One faking detection strategy that appears promising, but has received little research attention, is the bogus knowledge approach. In the bogus knowledge approach, applicants are presented with non-existent tasks, principles, or equipment that appear to be related to the job for which they are applying (Anderson et al., 1984; Pannone, 1984). Individuals who are trying to portray themselves in an unduly positive light will feign familiarity with the non-existent concepts. In this study, I assessed whether a bogus knowledge test (i.e., a test with fictitious job knowledge items embedded amongst actual job knowledge items) was a valid tool for identifying faking, and I compared its effectiveness to that of an impression management (IM) scale. I also explored the possibility that individuals who are willing to engage in faking may also be likely to engage in other dishonest behaviours, both at work and outside of work. 209 employed individuals participated in a laboratory study that involved a simulated employee selection situation and featured an applicant condition and an honest instructions condition. Participants' personalities and dishonest behaviours at work and outside of work were assessed through self- and peer-reports. The results showed some support for the validity of the bogus knowledge test for identifying response distortion. The bogus knowledge test also compared favourably to the IM test. The notion that individuals who engaged in greater amounts of faking would also engage in other forms of dishonesty received very limited support, primarily when response distortion was measured with the difference between applicant and honest instructions IM scores. The practical and theoretical implications of this study are discussed and directions for future research are highlighted.