Does multidimensional forced-choice prevent faking? Comparing the susceptibility of the multidimensional forced-choice format and the rating scale format to faking.
Does multidimensional forced-choice prevent faking? Comparing the susceptibility of the multidimensional forced-choice format and the rating scale format to faking.
复制标题
多维强制选择可以防止造假吗？
作者：
Eunike Wetzel;Susanne Frick;Anna Brown
在选择环境中自我报告人格特质的一个常见问题是伪造。多维强制选择（MFC）格式已被提议作为评级量表（RS）的替代方案，可以防止造假。本研究的目的是比较 MFC 格式和 RS 格式在模拟高风险环境中使用两种格式的规范评分时对造假的敏感性。参与者被随机分配到 3 组（总共 N = 1,867），并在诚实的指导下和假好的指导下填写一次大五三元组。诚实政府和假冒良好政府之间的潜在平均差异表明，“大五”域名是按照预期方向伪造的。与 MFC 相比，RS 对所有性状的伪造影响更大。与社会期望完全匹配的三胞胎 MFC 版本相比，混合三胞胎的 MFC 版本的伪造效果也更大。 MFC 格式并不能完全防止伪造，但可以大大减少伪造。在 MFC 格式中，可以通过匹配块中呈现的项目的社会期望值来进一步减少伪造。 （PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA，保留所有权利）。
A common concern with self-reports of personality traits in selection contexts is faking. The multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) format has been proposed as an alternative to rating scales (RS) that could prevent faking. The goal of this study was to compare the susceptibility of the MFC format and the RS format to faking in a simulated high-stakes setting when using normative scoring for both formats. Participants were randomly assigned to 3 groups (total N = 1,867) and filled out the Big Five Triplets once under an honest instruction and once under a fake-good instruction. Latent mean differences between the honest and fake-good administrations indicated that the Big Five domains were faked in the expected direction. Faking effects for all traits were larger for RS compared with MFC. Faking effects were also larger for the MFC version with mixed triplets compared with the MFC version with triplets that were fully matched regarding their social desirability. The MFC format does not prevent faking completely, but it reduces faking substantially. Faking can be further reduced in the MFC format by matching the items presented in a block regarding their social desirability. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).