强迫选择回答格式能否减少社会厌恶型人格特质的伪造?

IF 2.8 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of personality assessment Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-19 DOI:10.1080/00223891.2024.2326893
Amanda L Y Valone, Adam W Meade
{"title":"强迫选择回答格式能否减少社会厌恶型人格特质的伪造?","authors":"Amanda L Y Valone, Adam W Meade","doi":"10.1080/00223891.2024.2326893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Self-report assessments are the standard for personality measurement, but motivated respondents are able to manipulate or fake their responses to typical Likert scale self-report. Although progress has been made in research seeking to reduce faking, most of it has focused on normative personality traits such as those measured by the five factor model. The measurement of socially aversive personality (e.g., the Dark Triad) is less well-researched. The negative aspects of socially aversive traits increase the opportunity and motivation of respondents to fake typical single-stimulus self-report assessments underscoring the need for faking resistant response formats. A possible way to reduce faking that has been explored in basic personality research is the use of the forced-choice response format. This study applied this method to socially aversive traits and illustrated best practices to create new multidimensional forced-choice and single-stimulus measures of socially aversive personality traits. Results indicated that participants were able to artificially alter their scores when asked to respond like an ideal job applicant, and counter to expectations, the forced-choice format did not decrease faking. Our results indicate that even when best practices are followed, forced-choice format is not a panacea for respondent faking.</p>","PeriodicalId":16707,"journal":{"name":"Journal of personality assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can Forced-Choice Response Format Reduce Faking of Socially Aversive Personality Traits?\",\"authors\":\"Amanda L Y Valone, Adam W Meade\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00223891.2024.2326893\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Self-report assessments are the standard for personality measurement, but motivated respondents are able to manipulate or fake their responses to typical Likert scale self-report. Although progress has been made in research seeking to reduce faking, most of it has focused on normative personality traits such as those measured by the five factor model. The measurement of socially aversive personality (e.g., the Dark Triad) is less well-researched. The negative aspects of socially aversive traits increase the opportunity and motivation of respondents to fake typical single-stimulus self-report assessments underscoring the need for faking resistant response formats. A possible way to reduce faking that has been explored in basic personality research is the use of the forced-choice response format. This study applied this method to socially aversive traits and illustrated best practices to create new multidimensional forced-choice and single-stimulus measures of socially aversive personality traits. Results indicated that participants were able to artificially alter their scores when asked to respond like an ideal job applicant, and counter to expectations, the forced-choice format did not decrease faking. Our results indicate that even when best practices are followed, forced-choice format is not a panacea for respondent faking.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of personality assessment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of personality assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2024.2326893\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of personality assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2024.2326893","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自我报告评估是人格测量的标准,但动机积极的受访者能够操纵或伪造他们对典型的李克特量表自我报告的回答。尽管在减少伪造方面的研究取得了进展,但大部分研究都集中在规范人格特质上,如五因素模型所测量的人格特质。对社会厌恶型人格(如 "黑暗三合会")的测量研究较少。社会厌恶性人格特质的消极方面增加了受访者伪造典型的单一刺激自我报告评估的机会和动机,这就强调了伪造抗性反应形式的必要性。在基础人格研究中已经探索过的一种减少作假的可能方法是使用强迫选择回答格式。本研究将这种方法应用于社会厌恶人格特质,并说明了创建新的多维强迫选择和单刺激社会厌恶人格特质测量方法的最佳实践。结果表明,当被试者被要求像理想求职者那样回答时,他们能够人为地改变自己的分数,而且与预期相反,强迫选择的形式并没有减少作假。我们的研究结果表明,即使遵循了最佳做法,强迫选择的形式也不是解决受试者作假问题的灵丹妙药。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Can Forced-Choice Response Format Reduce Faking of Socially Aversive Personality Traits?

Self-report assessments are the standard for personality measurement, but motivated respondents are able to manipulate or fake their responses to typical Likert scale self-report. Although progress has been made in research seeking to reduce faking, most of it has focused on normative personality traits such as those measured by the five factor model. The measurement of socially aversive personality (e.g., the Dark Triad) is less well-researched. The negative aspects of socially aversive traits increase the opportunity and motivation of respondents to fake typical single-stimulus self-report assessments underscoring the need for faking resistant response formats. A possible way to reduce faking that has been explored in basic personality research is the use of the forced-choice response format. This study applied this method to socially aversive traits and illustrated best practices to create new multidimensional forced-choice and single-stimulus measures of socially aversive personality traits. Results indicated that participants were able to artificially alter their scores when asked to respond like an ideal job applicant, and counter to expectations, the forced-choice format did not decrease faking. Our results indicate that even when best practices are followed, forced-choice format is not a panacea for respondent faking.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
8.80%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The Journal of Personality Assessment (JPA) primarily publishes articles dealing with the development, evaluation, refinement, and application of personality assessment methods. Desirable articles address empirical, theoretical, instructional, or professional aspects of using psychological tests, interview data, or the applied clinical assessment process. They also advance the measurement, description, or understanding of personality, psychopathology, and human behavior. JPA is broadly concerned with developing and using personality assessment methods in clinical, counseling, forensic, and health psychology settings; with the assessment process in applied clinical practice; with the assessment of people of all ages and cultures; and with both normal and abnormal personality functioning.
期刊最新文献
Validation of the Persian Version of the ICD-11 Compatible Personality Inventory for DSM-5- Brief Form Plus, Modified. Evaluating the Psychometric Properties of the German Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SIFS). Improving the Objective Measurement of Alexithymia Using a Computer-Scored Alexithymia Provoked Response Questionnaire with an Online Sample. Unmasking Verbal Defensiveness: The Role of Psychological Threat in Sentence Completion Tests. Can Forced-Choice Response Format Reduce Faking of Socially Aversive Personality Traits?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1