Journal of experimental psychology. Applied
Doi:
https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000565
Response distortion (faking) on personality tests in high-stakes selection contexts, and the use of warnings to
mitigate it, remain critical issues in industrial-organizational psychology. Research on these issues, however, has
often been limited by practical andmethodological constraints, leaving notable gaps in our understanding of the
processes involved. To address these gaps, we conducted a study where 1,123 participants in a military selection
settingwere randomly assigned to three experimental groups: low-stakes control, high-stakes selection, and highstakes
warning. Performance indicators included admission to officer training, future officer rank, and job
performance. The results showed that group-level trait means changed in the expected directions under highstakes
conditions,while the factorial invariance and predictive validity of the personality measurewere preserved.
The incremental validity of personality traits over general mental ability remained consistent across groups,
supporting the robustness of personality assessments. While warnings reduced the mean score inflation, they
failed to enhance predictive validity and negatively impacted convergent validity with an unaffected premeasure
of personality. Warnings also resulted in other distortions, particularly among high-ability candidates. Overall,
these findings indicate that personality assessments retain practical utility in high-stakes settings when excluding
warnings, as such interventions may introduce unintended biases without improving selection outcomes.