Forced-Choice Self-Report Devices: A Look at Some Unwarranted Claims

John R. Braun

0 citations0/0 files storedMeasurement and Evaluation in Guidance

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Psychological Testing and Assessment Psychometric Methodologies and Testing Deception detection and forensic psychology

Abstract

Evidence is reviewed pertinent to the claims that forced-choice self-report devices effectively control for the social desirability of the alternatives presented to subjects, and that they cannot be faked. It is concluded that neither claim is supported by the available data.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 0 citations exist upstream.

References

1962A STUDY OF FAKING BEHAVIOR ON A FORCED‐CHOICE SELF‐DESCRIPTION CHECKLIST 1959Simulated patterns on the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule.1958The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS) and fakability.1960Social desirability and the forced choice method.1957Faking by sales applicants of a forced choice personality inventory.1956Fakability of a forced-choice personality test under realistic high school employment conditions.1953Fakability of the Jurgensen Classification Inventory.1956Fakability of the Gordon Personal Profile.

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.