Can People With Higher Versus Lower Scores on Impression Management or Self-Monitoring Be Identified Through Different Traces Under Faking?

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-02 DOI:10.1177/00131644231182598
Jessica Röhner, Philipp Thoss, Liad Uziel
{"title":"Can People With Higher Versus Lower Scores on Impression Management or Self-Monitoring Be Identified Through Different Traces Under Faking?","authors":"Jessica Röhner, Philipp Thoss, Liad Uziel","doi":"10.1177/00131644231182598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>According to faking models, personality variables and faking are related. Most prominently, people's tendency to try to make an appropriate impression (impression management; IM) and their tendency to adjust the impression they make (self-monitoring; SM) have been suggested to be associated with faking. Nevertheless, empirical findings connecting these personality variables to faking have been contradictory, partly because different studies have given individuals different tests to fake and different faking directions (to fake low vs. high scores). Importantly, whereas past research has focused on faking by examining test scores, recent advances have suggested that the faking process could be better understood by analyzing individuals' responses at the item level (response pattern). Using machine learning (elastic net and random forest regression), we reanalyzed a data set (<i>N</i> = 260) to investigate whether individuals' faked response patterns on extraversion (features; i.e., input variables) could reveal their IM and SM scores. We found that individuals had similar response patterns when they faked, irrespective of their IM scores (excluding the faking of high scores when random forest regression was used). Elastic net and random forest regression converged in revealing that individuals higher on SM differed from individuals lower on SM in how they faked. Thus, response patterns were able to reveal individuals' SM, but not IM. Feature importance analyses showed that whereas some items were faked differently by individuals with higher versus lower SM scores, others were faked similarly. Our results imply that analyses of response patterns offer valuable new insights into the faking process.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11095321/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231182598","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

According to faking models, personality variables and faking are related. Most prominently, people's tendency to try to make an appropriate impression (impression management; IM) and their tendency to adjust the impression they make (self-monitoring; SM) have been suggested to be associated with faking. Nevertheless, empirical findings connecting these personality variables to faking have been contradictory, partly because different studies have given individuals different tests to fake and different faking directions (to fake low vs. high scores). Importantly, whereas past research has focused on faking by examining test scores, recent advances have suggested that the faking process could be better understood by analyzing individuals' responses at the item level (response pattern). Using machine learning (elastic net and random forest regression), we reanalyzed a data set (N = 260) to investigate whether individuals' faked response patterns on extraversion (features; i.e., input variables) could reveal their IM and SM scores. We found that individuals had similar response patterns when they faked, irrespective of their IM scores (excluding the faking of high scores when random forest regression was used). Elastic net and random forest regression converged in revealing that individuals higher on SM differed from individuals lower on SM in how they faked. Thus, response patterns were able to reveal individuals' SM, but not IM. Feature importance analyses showed that whereas some items were faked differently by individuals with higher versus lower SM scores, others were faked similarly. Our results imply that analyses of response patterns offer valuable new insights into the faking process.

印象管理或自我监控得分较高与较低的人是否可以通过作假的不同痕迹来识别?
根据伪造模型,人格变量和伪造是相关的。最突出的是,人们试图给人留下适当印象的倾向(印象管理;IM)和调整自己留下的印象的趋势(自我监控;SM)被认为与造假有关。然而,将这些人格变量与造假联系起来的实证研究结果是矛盾的,部分原因是不同的研究给了个体不同的造假测试和不同的造假方向(低分与高分)。重要的是,尽管过去的研究侧重于通过检查考试成绩来造假,但最近的进展表明,通过分析个人在项目层面的反应(反应模式),可以更好地理解造假过程。使用机器学习(弹性网和随机森林回归),我们重新分析了一个数据集(N=260),以调查个体在外向性(特征;即输入变量)上的虚假反应模式是否可以揭示他们的IM和SM得分。我们发现,无论IM得分如何,个体在伪造时都有相似的反应模式(不包括使用随机森林回归时伪造高分的情况)。弹性网和随机森林回归表明,SM水平较高的个体和SM水平较低的个体在造假方式上有所不同。因此,反应模式能够揭示个体的SM,但不能揭示IM。特征重要性分析表明,尽管SM得分较高和较低的人对某些项目的伪造方式不同,但其他项目的伪造情况相似。我们的研究结果表明,对反应模式的分析为伪造过程提供了有价值的新见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信