Religious Orientation, Impression Management, and Self-Deception: Toward a Clarification of the Link between Religiosity and Social Desirability

1989 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary K. Leak ◽  
Stanley Fish
1989 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 284-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony C. Godwin ◽  
Joyce G. Crouch

The present study is a partial replication of Pecnik and Epperson's (1985a) study of expectations for Christian counseling versus counseling of an unspecified orientation, with the additional aim of clarifying the possible impact of counselor skill and social desirability upon these expectations. Undergraduate psychology students read one of four profiles of a counselor: Christian orientation, high skill; Christian orientation, unspecified skill; unspecified orientation, high skill; unspecified orientation, unspecified skill. These subjects, designated as Christian and non-Christian, rated the counselor profile on 19 variables related to counseling. In comparison to non-Christians, Christian subjects in general give higher ratings to the counselor regardless of the counselor's religious orientation. Non-Christian subjects rated the high skill counselor lower on several expectancy scales than Christian subjects did. No support was lent to the contentions that counselors with a Christian orientation are viewed as less expert than counselors in general or that social desirability can account for Christians’ higher expectations for counseling. Instead Christians may view counseling more positively.


1995 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjaana Lindeman ◽  
Markku Verkasalo

Based on previous research on socially desirable responding and positive—negative asymmetry, we hypothesized that (i) impression management is higher in public than in private settings, (ii) personal ideals linked to exemplification, ingratiation, and intimidation are related to an impression management tendency, (iii) negatively keyed social desirability items receive more extreme responses than positively keyed items, and (iv) self‐esteem is correlated higher with negatively than with positively keyed self‐deception items. Based on Jones and Pittman's (1982) model, exemplification, ingratiation, and intimidation are defined as impression management strategies that aim at presenting oneself as worthy, likable, or dangerous, respectively. Principally, the results obtained in a public setting (N=177) and a private setting (N= 165) support these hypotheses. The overall pattern of findings suggests that both context and personal ideals exert an influence on impression management scores, and that the keying direction of an item may be an important psychological determinant of a test response.


Author(s):  
JaeYoon Chang ◽  
Sanghee Nam

This study aimed to examine how social desirability responding(SDR) affects the criterion-related validity of self-reported personality. Specifically, this study examined how SDR, impression management(IM) and self deceptive enhancement(SDE) can take distinct effects on criteria when personality traits of 91 expatriates such as empathy, cooperation, and friendliness predict their performance criteria. Although previous studies suggested either suppression or moderation effects of SDR, the results indicated that there was no suppression effects but statistically significant moderation effects of SDE on the link between each of some predictors(empathy and cooperation) and expatriate’s negative emotional expression and helping behavior in organization rated by peers(host country nationals). However, such effects were not supported in case of IM. The importance of specifying two factors of SDR and suggestions for the future research were discussed.


1996 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Rosenfeld ◽  
Stephanie Booth-Kewley ◽  
Jack E. Edwards ◽  
Marle D. Thomas

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 752-760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Sassenrath

Past research showed that empathic responses are confounded with social desirability. The present research aims at illuminating this confound. In a first step, it is examined how a measure typically implemented to screen, for response, biases based on social desirability (i.e., the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding) relate to classical measures of interindividual differences in empathic responses (i.e., the Interpersonal Reactivity Index). Moreover, it is investigated what happens to empathic responses under conditions of reduced opportunity to behave socially desirable. Results of two correlational studies indicate that impression management (IM) as well as self-deceptive enhancement as facets of a socially desirable response bias is related to self-reported empathic responses. Results of an additional experiment show that introducing conditions reducing opportunity for IM lowers empathic responses toward a person in need. Implications for research on self-reported empathy and empathy-induced prosocial behavior are discussed.


2001 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 222-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joachim Stöber

Summary: Four studies are presented investigating the convergent validity, discriminant validity, and relationship with age of the Social Desirability Scale-17 (SDS-17). As to convergent validity, SDS-17 scores showed correlations between .52 and .85 with other measures of social desirability (Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Lie Scale, Sets of Four Scale, Marlowe-Crowne Scale). Moreover, scores were highly sensitive to social-desirability-provoking instructions (job-application instruction). Finally, with respect to the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding, SDS-17 scores showed a unique correlation with impression management, but not with self-deception. As to discriminant validity, SDS-17 scores showed nonsignificant correlations with neuroticism, extraversion, psychoticism, and openness to experience, whereas there was some overlap with agreeableness and conscientiousness. With respect to relationship with age, the SDS-17 was administered in a sample stratified for age, with age ranging from 18 to 89 years. In all but the oldest age group, the SDS-17 showed substantial correlations with the Marlowe-Crowne Scale. The influence of age (cohort) on mean scores, however, was significantly smaller for the SDS-17 than for the Marlowe-Crowne Scale. In sum, results indicate that the SDS-17 is a reliable and valid measure of social desirability, suitable for adults of 18 to 80 years of age.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. 278
Author(s):  
Lajunen ◽  
Gaygısız

A large number of studies in health psychology have shown that sense of coherence (SOC) is an essential factor in wellbeing and health. SOC is most commonly measured with the Antonovsky’s Orientation to Life Questionnaire (OLQ), which has been so far translated into at least 48 languages. Despite the vast popularity of the OLQ, the relationships between OLQ and socially desirable responding (impression management and self-deception) have not been studied. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the correlations between social desirability and Antonovsky’s OLQ. Method: The first sample consisted of 423 students who completed the 13-item OLQ and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), including the Lie scale. Also, the Balanced Inventory for Desirable Responding by Paulhus was administered together with the OLQ to 202 students. Results: SOC correlated positively with measures of social desirability among men but not among women. Hence, sex moderated the relationship between socially desirable responding and sense of coherence. Conclusions: Socially desirable responding and, especially, self-deception are positively related to high scores in SOC among men but not among women. The OLQ as a measure of sense of coherence can be used among women without worrying about the bias caused by socially desirable responding. When using the OLQ among men, the strong relationship between self-deception and sense of coherence should be taken into account.


2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (5) ◽  
pp. 532-543 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maja Parmač Kovačić ◽  
Zvonimir Galić ◽  
Željko Jerneić

1984 ◽  
Vol 117 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. J. Watson ◽  
Ralph W. Hood ◽  
Ronald J. Morris ◽  
James R. Hall

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document