I have been reading intensively and neglecting my blogging duties. The previously cited article by Detrick, Chibnall, & Call (JPA, 2010, 92,5, 410-415, DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2010.497401) really opens the vistas on self-presentational issues in psychological assessment. The aricle has a complete list of references, mostly from the non-clinical literature, which moves beyond superficial understandings of validity scales. Of interest is the article by Pauls & Crost, 2005, where the authors note that favorable self-presentational biases are associated with higher cognitive and emotional intelligence (ability to interpret test items in the context of the assessment situation). They note that the construct validity of scales changes under pressure of situational demands. One quote from the Pauls & Crost article deserves complete citation: “In other words, under situational pressure, personality questionnaires turn in part to measueres which are comparable to achievement tests. According to our view, it is the ability to respond to pesonality questionnaires in line with the expectations of others or the ability to fake on questionnaires, which is measured under situational pressure” (p. 196).
Reference: Pauls, C., & Crost, N.W. (2010). Cognitive ability and self-reported efficacy of self-presentation predict faking on personality measurers. Journal of Individual Differences, 26,4, 194-206.
Ironic. We think that the college-able examinees will present well on personality tests because they are LESS naive about testing, and that this will in some measure be verifiable (as with MMPI-2 K scale). IMHO the college students such tests are normed against usually are plenty naive. It’s just that they have intuited that extreme answers on standardized tests (“I never lie”) are probably not correct and they tend to moderate their response patterns. Also, they parse double negatives better. I think there are a lot of moving parts here. Can you share the article?