Cargando…

Detecting faking-good response style in personality questionnaires with four choice alternatives

Deliberate attempts to portray oneself in an unrealistic manner are commonly encountered in the administration of personality questionnaires. The main aim of the present study was to explore whether mouse tracking temporal indicators and machine learning models could improve the detection of subject...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Monaro, Merylin, Mazza, Cristina, Colasanti, Marco, Ferracuti, Stefano, Orrù, Graziella, di Domenico, Alberto, Sartori, Giuseppe, Roma, Paolo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8476468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33452928
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-020-01473-3
_version_ 1784575620718526464
author Monaro, Merylin
Mazza, Cristina
Colasanti, Marco
Ferracuti, Stefano
Orrù, Graziella
di Domenico, Alberto
Sartori, Giuseppe
Roma, Paolo
author_facet Monaro, Merylin
Mazza, Cristina
Colasanti, Marco
Ferracuti, Stefano
Orrù, Graziella
di Domenico, Alberto
Sartori, Giuseppe
Roma, Paolo
author_sort Monaro, Merylin
collection PubMed
description Deliberate attempts to portray oneself in an unrealistic manner are commonly encountered in the administration of personality questionnaires. The main aim of the present study was to explore whether mouse tracking temporal indicators and machine learning models could improve the detection of subjects implementing a faking-good response style when answering personality inventories with four choice alternatives, with and without time pressure. A total of 120 volunteers were randomly assigned to one of four experimental groups and asked to respond to the Virtuous Responding (VR) validity scale of the PPI-R and the Positive Impression Management (PIM) validity scale of the PAI via a computer mouse. A mixed design was implemented, and predictive models were calculated. The results showed that, on the PIM scale, faking-good participants were significantly slower in responding than honest respondents. Relative to VR items, PIM items are shorter in length and feature no negations. Accordingly, the PIM scale was found to be more sensitive in distinguishing between honest and faking-good respondents, demonstrating high classification accuracy (80–83%). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00426-020-01473-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8476468
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84764682021-10-08 Detecting faking-good response style in personality questionnaires with four choice alternatives Monaro, Merylin Mazza, Cristina Colasanti, Marco Ferracuti, Stefano Orrù, Graziella di Domenico, Alberto Sartori, Giuseppe Roma, Paolo Psychol Res Original Article Deliberate attempts to portray oneself in an unrealistic manner are commonly encountered in the administration of personality questionnaires. The main aim of the present study was to explore whether mouse tracking temporal indicators and machine learning models could improve the detection of subjects implementing a faking-good response style when answering personality inventories with four choice alternatives, with and without time pressure. A total of 120 volunteers were randomly assigned to one of four experimental groups and asked to respond to the Virtuous Responding (VR) validity scale of the PPI-R and the Positive Impression Management (PIM) validity scale of the PAI via a computer mouse. A mixed design was implemented, and predictive models were calculated. The results showed that, on the PIM scale, faking-good participants were significantly slower in responding than honest respondents. Relative to VR items, PIM items are shorter in length and feature no negations. Accordingly, the PIM scale was found to be more sensitive in distinguishing between honest and faking-good respondents, demonstrating high classification accuracy (80–83%). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00426-020-01473-3. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-01-16 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8476468/ /pubmed/33452928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-020-01473-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Monaro, Merylin
Mazza, Cristina
Colasanti, Marco
Ferracuti, Stefano
Orrù, Graziella
di Domenico, Alberto
Sartori, Giuseppe
Roma, Paolo
Detecting faking-good response style in personality questionnaires with four choice alternatives
title Detecting faking-good response style in personality questionnaires with four choice alternatives
title_full Detecting faking-good response style in personality questionnaires with four choice alternatives
title_fullStr Detecting faking-good response style in personality questionnaires with four choice alternatives
title_full_unstemmed Detecting faking-good response style in personality questionnaires with four choice alternatives
title_short Detecting faking-good response style in personality questionnaires with four choice alternatives
title_sort detecting faking-good response style in personality questionnaires with four choice alternatives
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8476468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33452928
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-020-01473-3
work_keys_str_mv AT monaromerylin detectingfakinggoodresponsestyleinpersonalityquestionnaireswithfourchoicealternatives
AT mazzacristina detectingfakinggoodresponsestyleinpersonalityquestionnaireswithfourchoicealternatives
AT colasantimarco detectingfakinggoodresponsestyleinpersonalityquestionnaireswithfourchoicealternatives
AT ferracutistefano detectingfakinggoodresponsestyleinpersonalityquestionnaireswithfourchoicealternatives
AT orrugraziella detectingfakinggoodresponsestyleinpersonalityquestionnaireswithfourchoicealternatives
AT didomenicoalberto detectingfakinggoodresponsestyleinpersonalityquestionnaireswithfourchoicealternatives
AT sartorigiuseppe detectingfakinggoodresponsestyleinpersonalityquestionnaireswithfourchoicealternatives
AT romapaolo detectingfakinggoodresponsestyleinpersonalityquestionnaireswithfourchoicealternatives