The over-claiming technique: Measuring self-enhancement independent of ability.

Abstract

Over-claiming is a concrete operalization of self-enhancement based on respondents' ratings of their knowledge of various persons, events, products, and so on. Because 20% of the items are nonexistent, responses can be analyzed with signal detection formulas to index both response bias (over-claiming) and accuracy (knowledge). Study 1 demonstrated convergence of over-claiming with alternative measures of self-enhancement but independence from cognitive ability. In Studies 2-3, the validity of the overclaiming index held even when respondents were (a) warned about the foils or (b) asked to fake good. Study 3 also showed the utility of the over-claiming index for diagnosing faking. In Study 4, the over-claiming technique was applied to the debate over the adaptive value of positive illusions.

Knowing what you know: Intellectual humility and judgments of recognition memory

“…The same procedure is followed for cut-points of 5, 3, and 2; the values of d′ and c are then averaged. See Paulhus et al (2003) for more explanation on converting scale responses into binary responses to calculate d′ and c.…”

“…The Over-claiming Questionnaire (Paulhus et al, 2003) measures participants' claims of knowledge regarding bogus topics (e.g., Jacques Worthington, Hamrick's Rebellion) relative to their claims of realworld knowledge (e.g., Susan B. Anthony, Mount Rushmore) to provide an index of their tendency to over-claim that they know things that they don't actually know. Here, participants rated 64 items, 40 of which were real and 24 of which were foils on a Likert scale from 1 (never heard of it) to 5 (very familiar with it).…”

“…Given that the OCQ responses were on a Likert scale rather than a dichotomous choice, they were analyzed according to the method utilized by Paulhus et al (2003) in which scores are calculated for each of the cut-points on the Likert scale and then averaged. In SDT terms, using this approach with "4" being the cut-point, a real item rated as 4 or above is considered a hit (correctly responding that one knows a real item); the same item rated as a 3 or below is considered a miss (incorrectly responding that one does not know a real item).…”

“…In a second task, participants were asked to rate their familiarity with a number of people, historical events, and scientific concepts, some of which were real and some of which were bogus (Paulhus, Harms, Bruce, & Lysy, 2003). As in the first task, we calculated both the sensitivity and bias of participants' claims, showing us the degree to which they accurately distinguished real from bogus targets and the degree to which they are biased to over-claim knowledge across the board.…”

Relationships between the Dark Triad and Delayed Gratification: An Evolutionary Perspective

“…Psychopathic impulsivity is attributable to poor impulse control (Jones & Paulhus, 2011b), whereas narcissistic impulsivity is related to overconfidence and unrealistic optimism (Paulhus, Harms, Bruce, & Lysy, 2003) and unrelated to limited self-control (Jonason & Tost, 2010). Narcissism is associated with strong approach and weak avoidance motivations (Foster & Trimm, 2008), sensation-seeking tendencies (Emmons, 1981), as well as cognitive biases in risk taking assessment (Foster, Shenesey, & Goff, 2009).…”