ABSTRACT
One of the most vexing problems facing the personality theorist is the degree to which assessment and evaluation instruments accurately reflect the personal characteristics that the theorist is attempting to describe. When psychologists cannot predict behavior, the fault may lie not in the theoretical constructs which they have developed, but in the methods they have used to assess the network of individual characteristics in which they are interested. When a person is called upon to answer questions about oneself, the answers given may be highly dependent on the impression the individual is trying to convey, the attitudes and behaviors of the person asking the questions, the purpose of the assessments, the type of situation in which the questions are enmeshed, and all those other complex demand characteristics which permeate any interpersonal relationship. Even in the early years of psychological testing, psychologists were aware that many individuals may attempt to present themselves in a favorable light, perhaps by “ faking good” or, in contrast, for one’s own particular reasons, present oneself negatively by “faking bad.” Early investigators saw response dissimula tion as a source of variance which they hoped could be controlled or eliminated so that a more accurate picture of the individual in whom they were interested could emerge. Several of the well-known assessment instruments, including the MMPI, were designed with “lie” scales and sets of items to reflect positive and negative response bias.
