In pursuit of process in personality prevarication: developing a model of faking behaviour

Test users have been concerned about the use of self-reported measures in high stakes assessments of personality, competencies and similar because they are open to socially desirable responding and even outright faking by respondents. Although there is a large body of quantitative research investigating the response process of faking on personality assessments, for both rating scales (RS) and multidimensional forced-choice (MFC), only a few studies have yet qualitatively investigated the underlying process mechanisms of faking when responding to MFC in a high stakes context (e.g., Sass et al., 2020). Thus, the question of what is going on in people's minds when completing a questionnaire in high stakes remains. Yet, I believe that we can only gather valid and valuable information from assessments once we establish a robust process model that effectively captures the decision-making process in high stakes scenarios. Subsequently, this thesis presents the Activate-Rank-Edit-Submit model (A-R-E-S model), a novel process model of applicant faking when responding to MFC personality assessment. To develop and validate this model, I identified stages and decision points within the response process that lead to either honest or falsified response and verified them by qualitatively examining the test takers' cognitions (Study 1, Chapter 3), and by experimentally manipulating factors that were thought to underpin these cognitions (Studies 2-5, Chapters 4-6). Overall, the A-R-E-S model stands as a promising tool, inviting continued investigation and refinement to better grasp the complexities of personality assessment in real-world scenarios.