1962
DOI: 10.1002/1097-4679(196204)18:2<140::aid-jclp2270180209>3.0.co;2-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The performance of male prisoners on the Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

1963
1963
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The religious group scored differently on both SDR scales when compared with the inmate and students samples, notably on the negative and denial scales, which is in accordance with the literature (Crandall & Gozali, 1969;Ellis & Smith, 1991;Leak & Fish, 1989), suggesting that items can trigger more SDR when they are related to religious values. The inmate population also showed a higher SDR pattern than the other two groups, which is in line with previous studies (Fisher & Parsons, 1962;Slaton et al, 2000;Stuckless et al, 1995). However, there is not a straightforward interpretation; on one hand, it can be assumed that prisoners have the ability to give a favorable image of themselves to impress the audience.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The religious group scored differently on both SDR scales when compared with the inmate and students samples, notably on the negative and denial scales, which is in accordance with the literature (Crandall & Gozali, 1969;Ellis & Smith, 1991;Leak & Fish, 1989), suggesting that items can trigger more SDR when they are related to religious values. The inmate population also showed a higher SDR pattern than the other two groups, which is in line with previous studies (Fisher & Parsons, 1962;Slaton et al, 2000;Stuckless et al, 1995). However, there is not a straightforward interpretation; on one hand, it can be assumed that prisoners have the ability to give a favorable image of themselves to impress the audience.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Prisoners can provide self-favorable descriptions when they are instructed to fake good in psychological tests (LoBello & Sims, 1993;Sackett & Lievens, 2008). They tend to score higher on SDR than normative groups (Fisher & Parsons, 1962;Slaton, Kern, & Curlette, 2000;Stuckless, Ford, & Vitelli, 1995). Sackett and Harris (1984) found that inmates scored more in the negative ranges of various integrity tests when compared with job applicants.…”
Section: Incarcerated Populationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This scale was included to neutralize any possible effect of the social desirability variable on the subject's responses. The fact that a large proportion of the subjects in this study were interviewed in total institutions made the existence of this effect very probable (Fisher & Parsons, 1962).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…According to the data, the need for social approval is inversely proportional to the educational situation, and as the educational situation increases, the need for social approval decreases (Johnson, & Fendrich, 2002;Klassen, Homstra, & Anderson, 1975, p. 450). In addition, it is found that there is a negative relationship between educational achievement and intelligence and the need for social approval (Evans, & Forbach, 1982;Fisher, 1967, p. 474);Fisher, & Parsons, 1962).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%