Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Paulhus, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Trapnell, P. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Paulhus, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Trapnell, P. D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 21, No. 2, 100-108 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167295212001
© 1995 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Effects of Self-Presentation Strategies on Personality Profiles and their Structure

Delroy L. Paulhus

University of British Columbia

M. Nadine Bruce

University of British Columbia

Paul D. Trapnell

University of British Columbia

To examine the claim that self presentation distorts the structure of personality dimensions, 370 subjects were asked to respond as job applicants to a measure of the Big Five personality traits and two measures of socially desirable responding (SDR): Self-Deceptive Enhancement and Impression Management. They were randomly assigned to respond using one of seven strategies: fake the best possible candidate, fake good without arousing suspicion, play up your good points, respond honestly, be modest, fake bad without arousing suspicion, fake worst. The SDR scales and the Big Five were highly intercorrelated under all strategies except honest responding. Further analyses suggested that the high intercorrelations were due to outliers, not to a true convergence of dimensions. It was concluded that self presentation can either inflate or deflate intercorrelations among evaluative scales. Self presentation in individuals was best diagnosed by the Impression Management and Conscientiousness scales.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 AssessmentHome page
M. Sellbom and R. M. Bagby
The Validity and Utility of the Positive Presentation Management and Negative Presentation Management Scales for the Revised NEO Personality Inventory
Assessment, June 1, 2008; 15(2): 165 - 176.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 AssessmentHome page
J. Yang, R. M. Bagby, and A. G. Ryder
Response Style and the Revised NEO Personality Inventory: Validity Scales and Spousal Ratings in a Chinese Psychiatric Sample
Assessment, December 1, 2000; 7(4): 389 - 402.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
T. A. Fossum and L. F. Barrett
Distinguishing Evaluation from Description in the Personality-Emotion Relationship
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, August 1, 2000; 26(6): 669 - 678.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
M. D. Robinson and C. D. Ryff
The Role of Self-Deception in Perceptions of Past, Present, and Future Happiness
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, May 1, 1999; 25(5): 596 - 608.
[Abstract] [PDF]