Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.17703/IJACT.2019.7.1.122

Revisiting the Faking Issues of the CRT-A with Koreans  

Park, Yonguk L. (Psychology Department, Yonsei University)
Lee, Hyejoo J. (Psychology Department, Handong Global University)
Publication Information
International Journal of Advanced Culture Technology / v.7, no.1, 2019 , pp. 122-127 More about this Journal
Abstract
The Conditional Reasoning Test for Aggression (CRT-A) is an implicit assessment for aggression. The CRT-A is known to be resistant to response distortion. We revisited LeBreton et al.'s (2007) studies on the faking issues of the CRT-A with the Korean population. We divided 488 Korean college students into three groups and asked them to take the CRT-A under different instructions. Results showed that Koreans were able to identify aggressive alternatives when the purpose of the test was fully disclosed, and the students were less likely to select aggressive alternatives if they were told that the CRT-A was a personality test.
Keywords
CRT-A; Aggression; Faking; Implicit measure; Assessment;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 James, L. R. (1998). Measurement of personality via conditional reasoning. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 131-163. doi.org/10.1177/109442819812001   DOI
2 James, L. R., McIntyre, M. D., Glisson, C. A., Green, P. D., Patton, T. W., LeBreton, J. M., et al. (2005). Conditional reasoning: An efficient, indirect method for assessing implicit cognitive readiness to aggress. Organizational Research Methods, 8, 69-99. doi.org/10.1177/1094428104272182   DOI
3 James, L. R., McIntyre, M. D., Glisson, C. A., Bowler, J. L, & Mitchell, T. R. (2004). The conditional reasoning measurement system for aggression: An overview. Human Performance, 17, 271-295. doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1703_2   DOI
4 Burroughs, S. M. (2001). The role of dispositional aggressiveness and organizational injustice on deviant workplace behavior. Unpublished manuscript, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
5 Frost, B. C., Ko, C-H. E., & James, L. R. (2007). Implicit and explicit personality: A test of a channeling hypothesis for aggressive behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1299-1319. dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1299   DOI
6 LeBreton, J. M., Barksdale, C. D., Robin, J., & James, L. R. (2007). Measurement issues associated with conditional reasoning tests: Indirect measurement and test faking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1-16. dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.1   DOI
7 Motowidlo, S. J., Hooper, A. C., Jackson, H. L. (2006). Implicit policies about relations between personality traits and behavioral effectiveness in situational judgment items. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 749-761. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.749   DOI
8 Cook, M. (1993). Personnel selection and productivity. New York: Wiley.
9 Hogan, R., Hogan, J., & Roberts, B. W. (1996). Personality measurement and employment decisions. American Psychologist, 51, 469-477. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.5.469   DOI
10 Rosse, J. G., Stecher, M. D., Miller, J. L., & Levin, R. A. (1998). The impact of response distortion on preemployment personality testing and hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 634-644. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.83.4.634   DOI
11 Fink, M. (1963). Cross validation of an underachievement scale. California Journal of Educational Research, 14, 147-152.
12 Sinaiko, H. (1963). Men, Machines and Systems. PsycCRITIQUES, 8, 297-298.
13 Werner, O. & Campbell, D.T. (1970). Translating, working through interpreters and the problem of decentering. In R. Naroll & R. Cohen (Eds.), A handbook of method in cultural anthropology (pp. 398-420). New York: The Natural History Press.
14 Amelang, M., Schafer, A., & Yousfi, S. (2002). Comparing verbal and nonverbal personality scales: Investigating the validity and reliability, the influence of social desirability, and the effects of fake good instructions. Psychologische Beitrage, 44, 24-41.
15 Piedmont, R. L., McCrae, R. R., Riemann, R., & Angleitner, A. (2000). On the invalidity of validity scales: Evidence from self-reports and observer ratings in volunteer samples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 582-593. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.3.582   DOI
16 Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (1999). Meta-analysis of fakability estimates: Implications or personality measurement. Educational Psychological Measurement, 59, 197-210. doi.org/10.1177/00131649921969802   DOI
17 Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., Martin, M. A., & Vitacco, M. J. (2003). Detection of faked mental disorders: A meta-analysis of the MMPI-2 and malingering. Assessment, 10, 160-177. doi.org/10.1177/1073191103010002007   DOI