Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Assessment
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Detrick, P.
Right arrow Articles by Chibnall, J. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Detrick, P.
Right arrow Articles by Chibnall, J. T.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Positive Response Distortion by Police Officer Applicants

Association of Paulhus Deception Scales With MMPI-2 and Inwald Personality Inventory Validity Scales

Paul Detrick

Florissant Psychological Services, fps-stl{at}sbcglobal.net

John T. Chibnall

Saint Louis University School of Medicine

Interpretation of positive response distortion (socially desirable responding) in employment evaluations is an important validity issue. This study of police officer applicants examined the construct validity of the Paulhus Deception Scales (PDS)—Moralistic Bias (MB; exaggerated adjustment/agreeableness) and Egoistic Bias (EB; exaggerated power/ status)—in relation to validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory—2 (MMPI-2; L, K, and S) and Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI; Guardedness). In regression analyses, MB was significantly associated with each validity scale (particularly L and Guardedness), whereas EB was significantly, but weakly, associated with L only. MB is consistent with response distortion as reflected in L ("perfect" adjustment/personality) and Guardedness (denial of shortcomings/faults). EB is a unique form of response distortion that is not reflected in MMPI-2 or IPI validity scales. The relevance of EB to self-assessment among police officer applicants is an important practical concern in personnel selection and an important theoretical question for future response distortion research.

Key Words: response bias • social desirability • personnel selection • Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory • test validity

Assessment, Vol. 15, No. 1, 87-96 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1073191107306082
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?