Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Response distortion on personality tests in applicants: comparing high-stakes to low-stakes medical settings

  • Published:
Advances in Health Sciences Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The current study examined the degree to which applicants applying for medical internships distort their responses to personality tests and assessed whether this response distortion led to reduced predictive validity. The applicant sample (n = 530) completed the NEO Personality Inventory whilst applying for one of 60 positions as first-year post-graduate medical interns. Predictive validity was assessed using university grades, averaged over the entire medical degree. Applicant responses for the Big Five (i.e., neuroticism, extraversion, openness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness) and 30 facets of personality were compared to a range of normative samples where personality was measured in standard research settings including medical students, role model physicians, current interns, and standard young-adult test norms. Applicants had substantially higher scores on conscientiousness, openness, agreeableness, and extraversion and lower scores on neuroticism with an average absolute standardized difference of 1.03, when averaged over the normative samples. While current interns, medical students, and especially role model physicians do show a more socially desirable personality profile than standard test norms, applicants provided responses that were substantially more socially desirable. Of the Big Five, conscientiousness was the strongest predictor of academic performance in both applicants (r = .11) and medical students (r = .21). Findings suggest that applicants engage in substantial response distortion, and that the predictive validity of personality is modest and may be reduced in an applicant setting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albanese, M. A., Snow, M. H., Skochelak, S. E., Huggett, K. N., & Farrell, P. M. (2003). Assessing personal qualities in medical school admissions. Academic Medicine, 78(3), 313–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anglim, J., & Grant, S. L. (2016). Predicting psychological and subjective well-being from personality: Incremental prediction from 30 facets over the big 5. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17, 59–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anglim, J., Morse, G., De Vries, R. E., Maccann, C., & Marty, A. (2017). Comparing job applicants to non-applicants using an item-level bifactor model on the HEXACO Personality Inventory. European Journal of Personality. doi:10.1002/per.2120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkeland, S. A., Manson, T. M., Kisamore, J. L., Brannick, M. T., & Smith, M. A. (2006). A meta-analytic investigation of job applicant faking on personality measures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14(4), 317–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bore, M., Munro, D., & Powis, D. (2009). A comprehensive model for the selection of medical students. Medical Teacher, 31(12), 1066–1072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., & Mccrae, R. R. (1992). Neo PI-R professional manual: Odessa. FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Fruyt, F., De Bolle, M., Mccrae, R. R., Terracciano, A., & Costa, P. T. (2009). Assessing the universal structure of personality in early adolescence: The NEO-PI-R and NEO-PI-3 in 24 cultures. Assessment, 16(3), 301–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Leng, W. E., Stegers-Jager, K. M., Husbands, A., Dowell, J. S., Born, M. P., & Themmen, A. P. N. (2017). Scoring method of a situational judgment test: Influence on internal consistency reliability, adverse impact and correlation with personality? Advances in Health Sciences Education, 22, 243–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vries, A., De Vries, R. E., & Born, M. P. (2011). Broad versus narrow traits: Conscientiousness and Honesty–Humility as predictors of academic criteria. European Journal of Personality, 25(5), 336–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doherty, E. M., & Nugent, E. (2011). Personality factors and medical training: A review of the literature. Medical Education, 45(2), 132–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eva, K. W., & Macala, C. (2014). Multiple mini-interview test characteristics: ‘Tis better to ask candidates to recall than to imagine. Medical Education, 48(6), 604–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eva, K. W., Reiter, H. I., Trinh, K., Wasi, P., Rosenfeld, J., & Norman, G. R. (2009). Predictive validity of the multiple mini-interview for selecting medical trainees. Medical Education, 43(8), 767–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eva, K. W., Rosenfeld, J., Reiter, H. I., & Norman, G. R. (2004). An admissions OSCE: The multiple mini-interview. Medical Education, 38(3), 314–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, E., Mcmanus, I., James, D., O’hehir, F., & Sanders, A. (2003). Pilot study of the roles of personality, references, and personal statements in relation to performance over the five years of a medical degreeCommentary: How to derive causes from correlations in educational studies. BMJ, 326(7386), 429–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, E. K., & Watson, D. (2002). General and specific traits of personality and their relation to sleep and academic performance. Journal of Personality, 70(2), 177–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, B., Harding, D. W., Wilson, I. G., & Yeomans, N. D. (2008). Does practice make perfect? The effect of coaching and retesting on selection tests used for admission to an Australian medical school. Medical Journal of Australia, 189(5), 270–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, B., Hesketh, B., & Grayson, D. (2004). Applicants faking good: Evidence of item bias in the NEO PI-R. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(7), 1545–1558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, B., & Wilson, I. G. (2012a). Associations between the big five personality factors and multiple mini-interviews. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 17(3), 377–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, B., & Wilson, I. G. (2012b). Faking good: Self-enhancement in medical school applicants. Medical Education, 46(5), 485–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haight, S. J., Chibnall, J. T., Schindler, D. L., & Slavin, S. J. (2012). Associations of medical student personality and health/wellness characteristics with their medical school performance across the curriculum. Academic Medicine, 87(4), 476–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobfoll, S., Anson, O., & Antonovsky, A. (1982). Personality factors as predictors of medical student performance. Medical Education, 16(5), 251–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hojat, M., Michalec, B., Jon Veloski, J., & Tykocinski, M. L. (2015). Can empathy, other personality attributes, and level of positive social influence in medical school identify potential leaders in medicine? Academic Medicine, 90(4), 505–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hojat, M., Nasca, T. J., Magee, M., Feeney, K., Pascual, R., Urbano, F., et al. (1999). A comparison of the personality profiles of internal medicine residents, physician role models, and the general population. Academic Medicine, 74(12), 1327–1333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horwood, S., Anglim, J., & Tooley, G. (2015). Type D personality and the Five-Factor Model: A facet-level analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 83, 50–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jerant, A., Griffin, E., Rainwater, J., Henderson, M., Sousa, F., Bertakis, K. D., et al. (2012). Does applicant personality influence multiple mini-interview performance and medical school acceptance offers? Academic Medicine, 87(9), 1250–1259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knights, J. A., & Kennedy, B. J. (2007). Medical school selection: Impact of dysfunctional tendencies on academic performance. Medical Education, 41(4), 362–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulasegaram, K., Reiter, H. I., Wiesner, W., Hackett, R. D., & Norman, G. R. (2010). Non-association between NEO-5 personality tests and multiple mini-interview. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(3), 415–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Libbrecht, N., Lievens, F., Carette, B., & Côté, S. (2014). Emotional intelligence predicts success in medical school. Emotion, 14(1), 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lievens, F. (2013). Adjusting medical school admission: Assessing interpersonal skills using situational judgement tests. Medical Education, 47(2), 182–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lievens, F., Coetsier, P., De Fruyt, F., & De Maeseneer, J. (2002). Medical students’ personality characteristics and academic performance: A five-factor model perspective. Medical Education, 36(11), 1050–1056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lievens, F., Ones, D. S., & Dilchert, S. (2009). Personality scale validities increase throughout medical school. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1514–1535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, R. K., Dowell, J., Ayansina, D., & Cleland, J. A. (2017). Do personality traits assessed on medical school admission predict exit performance? A UK-wide longitudinal cohort study. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 22, 365–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, M. B., De Fruyt, F., Rolland, J.-P., & Bagby, R. M. (2005). Socially desirable responding and the factorial stability of the NEO PI-R. Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 379–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mccrae, R. R., Costa, J., Paul, T., & Martin, T. A. (2005). The NEO-PI-3: A more readable revised NEO personality inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84(3), 261–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mclarnon, M. J., Rothstein, M. G., Goffin, R. D., Rieder, M. J., Poole, A., Krajewski, H. T., et al. (2017). How important is personality in the selection of medical school students? Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 442–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mcmanus, I., Keeling, A., & Paice, E. (2004). Stress, burnout and doctors’ attitudes to work are determined by personality and learning style: A twelve year longitudinal study of UK medical graduates. BMC Medicine, 2, 29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mesmer-Magnus, J., & Viswesvaran, C. (2006). Assessing response distortion in personality tests: A review of research designs and analytic strategies. In M. H. Peterson & R. L. Griffith (Eds.), A closer examination of applicant faking behavior (pp. 85–113). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgeson, F. P., Campion, M. A., Dipboye, R. L., Hollenbeck, J. R., Murphy, K., & Schmitt, N. (2007). Reconsidering the use of personality tests in personnel selection contexts. Personnel Psychology, 60(3), 683–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musson, D. M. (2009). Personality and medical education. Medical Education, 43(5), 395–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olkin, I., & Finn, J. D. (1995). Correlations redux. Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 155–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oswald, F. L., & Hough, L. M. (2008). Personality testing and industrial–organizational psychology: A productive exchange and some future directions. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1(3), 323–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, F., Ashworth, V., Zibarras, L., Coan, P., Kerrin, M., & O’neill, P. (2012). Evaluations of situational judgement tests to assess non-academic attributes in selection. Medical Education, 46(9), 850–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, F., Baron, H., Carr, V., Plint, S., & Lane, P. (2009). Evaluation of three short-listing methodologies for selection into postgraduate training in general practice. Medical Education, 43(1), 50–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, F., Knight, A., Dowell, J., Nicholson, S., Cousans, F., & Cleland, J. (2016). How effective are selection methods in medical education? A systematic review. Medical Education, 50(1), 36–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paunonen, S. V., & Jackson, D. N. (2000). What is beyond the big five? Plenty! Journal of Personality, 68(5), 821–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, R., Khaw, H., & Edariah, A. (1995). Personality and performance of preclinical medical students. Medical Education, 29(4), 283–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pohl, C. A., Hojat, M., & Arnold, L. (2011). Peer nominations as related to academic attainment, empathy, personality, and specialty interest. Academic Medicine, 86(6), 747–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135(2), 322–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, M. G., & Goffin, R. D. (2006). The use of personality measures in personnel selection: What does current research support? Human Resource Management Review, 16(2), 155–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen, H., & Comrey, A. L. (1997). Predicting medical students’ academic performances by their cognitive abilities and personality characteristics. Academic Medicine, 72(9), 781–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, Y., & Shi, M. (2017). Associations between empathy and big five personality traits among Chinese undergraduate medical students. PLoS ONE, 12(2), e0171665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyssen, R., Dolatowski, F. C., Røvik, J. O., Thorkildsen, R. F., Ekeberg, Ø., Hem, E., et al. (2007). Personality traits and types predict medical school stress: A six-year longitudinal and nationwide study. Medical Education, 41(8), 781–787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woo, S. E., Jin, J., & Lebreton, J. M. (2015). Specificity matters: Criterion-related validity of contextualized and facet measures of conscientiousness in predicting college student performance. Journal of Personality Assessment, 97(3), 301–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Psychology, Deakin University, Locked Bag 20000, Geelong, 3220, Australia

    Jeromy Anglim & Stefan Bozic

  2. Abbotsford, Melbourne, VA, Australia

    Jonathon Little

  3. Department of Personnel Management, Work and Organizational Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Filip Lievens

Authors
  1. Jeromy Anglim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefan Bozic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jonathon Little
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Filip Lievens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeromy Anglim.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 493 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anglim, J., Bozic, S., Little, J. et al. Response distortion on personality tests in applicants: comparing high-stakes to low-stakes medical settings. Adv in Health Sci Educ 23, 311–321 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-017-9796-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-017-9796-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation