lnu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The Relationship Between Honesty-Humility And Social Desirability: High-Stake Versus Low-Stake Situations
Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Department of Psychology.
Linnaeus University, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Department of Psychology.
2018 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (Two Years)), 20 credits / 30 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

Faking in applications was found to be an important issue in which social desirability plays a relevant role. The present study brings Social Desirability Responding, Honesty-Humility, and different stakes of situations into relation. Social Desirability Responding, i.e. Communion Management and Self-Deceptive Enhancement, operationalized by the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR) and Honesty-Humility (HEXACO-60) are analysed regarding their relationships and differences in and between high-stake, low-stake, and high-stake-low-framed situations. Relationships between Honesty-Humility and Communion Management were significantly positive, while no relationship between Honesty-Humility and Self-Deceptive Enhancement was found. There were also no significant differences in the constructs across situations. It was further investigated whether individuals scoring low in Honesty-Humility show different responding behaviour dependent on situational frames compared to individuals scoring high in Honesty-Humility. No significant differences were found. Results imply that Social Desirable Responding scales do not measure what they intent to, hence further research is needed. The tested high-stake-low-framed situational instruction did not significantly reduce faking. However, exploring the option of framing application situations is recommended for organizations. Further, the problematic nature of measuring Social Desirability Responding is considered.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. , p. 31
Keywords [en]
Honesty-Humility, HEXACO, Social Desirability, Communion Management, Self-Deceptive Enhancement, High-stake, Low-Stake, Faking, Applications
National Category
Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-74868OAI: oai:DiVA.org:lnu-74868DiVA, id: diva2:1212571
Subject / course
Psychology
Educational program
Psychology, work and organizational psychology, Master Programme, 120 credits
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2018-06-07 Created: 2018-06-02 Last updated: 2018-06-07Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(301 kB)29 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 301 kBChecksum SHA-512
d3079631384f9e8a6f1c1c8666b75fcf13f7067fd4e5bd58b801ea034c0515cc1dbb5b696d64dfcba0fda2ff5440cddbfecd0843359cc912b4cb71a0a7777779
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Department of Psychology
Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 29 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 72 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf