مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد پرسشنامه شخصیتی مقاوم در برابر جعل – الزویر 2019

This study examined resistance of item parameters of a personality questionnaire to faking. We proposed seven construct-irrelevant item attributes (CIIAs), each composing of two opposite values, representing degrees of adherence to the respective CIIAs (e.g., based on the time frame embedded in the stem, items were divided into past and present). We developed a personality inventory that measured conscientiousness. Items of the questionnaire were written to embody all the seven CIIAs. Participants of the study (N = 543) were divided into two groups: honest and faking groups. Those in the honest group were instructed to respond honestly whereas those in the faking groups were asked to respond as if they were job applicants. Multi-group latent variable modeling was used to examine the score differences of the participants’ responses to the items of the conscientiousness section of the NEO FFI. It was found that items on two of the CIIAs were resistant to faking. Applying a Wald test of equality of item parameters, we found that the items did not show differential item functioning in either of the attributes.

Introduction

The answers to one of various questions about faking on personality scales have reached a consensus: people can fake their responses to the items of personality inventories (Viswesvaran & Ones, 1999). Therefore, research on faking behavior should shift from a retroactive to a proactive paradigm (Fan et al., 2012). In the retroactive paradigm, faking is allowed to occur during the test administration process. There are certain techniques (e.g., faking correction) which can be employed to refine the obtained scores to exclude the effect of faking. In contrast, in the proactive paradigm, researchers develop instruments in certain ways so as to make them more resistant to faking. There have been a few attempts to study the effect of different factors on making test items more faking-proof including modifying test format (Jackson, Wroblewski, & Ashton, 2000) or response format (Kubinger, 2009), composing items with similar content placed randomly (e.g., McFarland, Ryan, & Ellis, 2002), warning the participants (e.g., Dwight & Donovan, 2003), and using implicit measures (Vecchione, Dentale, Alessandri, & Barbaranelli, 2014). To a much lesser extent, the proactive impact of writing item has been investigated (e.g., Vasilopoulos & Cucina, 2006). In all the manifestations of the proactive approach, scale developers take preemptive measures to deal with faking. The present study is an attempt at exploring the effect of the proactive approach via identifying item characteristics of a personality inventory that make them less vulnerable to faking.