This study investigates the extent to which job applicants fake their responses on personality tests. Thirty-three studies that compared job applicant and non-applicant personality scale scores were meta-analyzed. Across all job types, applicants scored significantly higher than non-applicants on extraversion (d 5 .11), emotional stability (d 5 .44), conscientiousness (d 5 .45), and openness (d 5 .13). For certain jobs (e.g., sales), however, the rank ordering of mean differences changed substantially suggesting that job applicants distort responses on personality dimensions that are viewed as particularly job relevant. Smaller mean differences were found in this study than those reported by Viswesvaran and Ones (Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59(2),(197)(198)(199)(200)(201)(202)(203)(204)(205)(206)(207)(208)(209)(210), who compared scores for induced ''fake-good'' vs. honest response conditions. Also, direct Big Five measures produced substantially larger differences than did indirect Big Five measures.

No abstract

Popularized by Microsoft in the 1990s, the puzzle interview is being used with greater frequency by employers in a variety of industries. The present study was designed to explore applicant reactions to puzzle interviews. 360 participants watched either a puzzle interview or a behavioral interview. The job for which the interviewee was applying was also manipulated. Results showed that participant ratings of several reactions variables were significantly lower for puzzle interviews. The findings were consistent across four different jobs. Implications for the use of puzzle interviews in industry and for future research are discussed.

In two studies, we assessed the effectiveness of a classroom activity designed to increase students' ability to think critically. This activity involved watching and discussing an infomercial that contained pseudoscientific claims, thus incorporating course material on good research design and critical thinking. In Study 1, we used a pretest-posttest design. After the activity, students were significantly more likely to correctly identify flaws in a series of claims. In Study 2, we compared the effectiveness of this activity to a traditional lecture. Participation in the activity was more effective at increasing students' ability to critically evaluate claims than the lecture. These results suggest that short-term interventions to increase critical thinking can be successful and can be made interesting for students.

The purpose of this experiment was to determine if the existence of high blood pressure or allergies would decrease the likelihood of a person obtaining a job. Forty-eight college students rated hypothetical job applicants with allergies, high blood pressure, or no adverse physical condition for either a high-stress manager trainee position or a low-stress bookkeeper position. For the manager trainee position, applicants with either high blood pressure or allergies were rated significantly lower than the applicants with no adverse physical condition. For the bookkeeper position there were no significant differences between the ratings of the individuals with the different physical conditions. These results suggest that any adverse physical condition may have a negative prototype associated with it; however, a job applicant's physical condition may have different consequences depending upon the type of job for which he/she is applying. The effect of the stress level of the different jobs on the ratings was discussed.Research directed toward determining the effect of a physical disability on a person's employment potential has produced results that are apparently contradictory. Shaw (1972) and Krefting and Brief (1976) reported much less serious consequences for the disabled than those reported by Johnson and Heal (1976) and Scheurle, Guilford, and Garcia (1982).