A COMPARISON OF IPSATIVE AND NORMATIVE APPROACHES FOR ABILITY TO CONTROL FAKING IN PERSONALITY QUESTIONNAIRES

The current study extends previous research by comparing empirical data on ipsative and normative versions of the 30‐scale Occupational Personality Questionnaire (OPQ). Participants were randomly assigned to “honest” or “faking” groups. Results support the proposition that when the number of scales is large, the measurement dependency problem associated with the ipsative format is negligible. There was satisfactory convergent validity between ipsative and normative forms in both groups. On both forms, the distance between an ideal profile and participants' ratings were narrower in the faking group than in the honest group. The results suggest that though ipsative measures were not completely free from faking, they were relatively more effective in guarding against faking than more commonly used normative measures.