사회적 바람직성 상, 하위 집단 간 성격검사의 구인동등성 검증 = Test of Construct Equivalence of Personality Inventory in Low and High Socially Desirable Responding Groups

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the construct equivalence of a personality inventory in a low and high socially desirable responding (SDR) groups. In the pursuit of achieving the purposes, a multi-group confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to test the configural, metric, and scalar invariance in the two groups' data. Total of 2,799 undergraduate students responded to the reduced personality inventory which was based on the Personality Inventory developed by the Central Employment Information Office (2001) and Korean version of Paulus' (2002) BIDR-7 that consists of two sub-scales, namely the self-deceptive enhancement scale and the impression management scale. The results of the construct equivalence tests provided evidence that supported the configural and metric invariance in the two groups. The results also showed that (1) between the low and high self-deceptive enhancement groups, substantial effect sizes were observed in the conscientiousness and emotional stability items; (2) between the low and high impression management groups, substantial effect sizes were observed in the agreeableness and conscientiousness items. It was worth noting that social desirability did not alter the factor structures that characterized the personality inventory used in this study. The results implied that the personal inventory could be used commonly in the low and high SDR groups. However, since it failed to ensure scalar invariance, the personality inventory scores from each group were to be compared cautiously. The limitation of this study and suggestions for following studies were discussed.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구에서는 사회적 바람직성이 자기보고식 성격검사의 구인타당도에 미치는 영향력을 알아보기 위한 한 가지 방안으로 사회적 바람직성이 높은 집단과 낮은 집단에서 성격구인이 동등한지를 탐색하였다. 이를 위해 5요인 성격검사(중앙고용정보원, 2001)를 대학생 2,799명을 대상으로 실시하여 외향성, 호감성, 성실성, 정서적 불안정성, 개방성의 각 주요인에 해당하는 5문항을 선정하여, 총 25문항으로 척도를 축소하여 본 연구에 활용하였다. 사회적 바람직성이 높은 집단과 낮은 집단에서 성격구인이 동등한지 알아보기 위해서 먼저 사회적 바람직성 하위척도인 자기기만적 고양 및 인상관리 점수에 근거하여 상, 하위 집단을 구성한 뒤, 두 집단 간 다집단 확인적 요인분석을 실시하였다. 그 결과, 두 집단 간 형태불변성과 측정불변성이 확인되어 사회적 바람직성의 영향력이 있음에도 성격구인이 어느 정도 유지되었음을 알 수 있었으나 척도불변성이 확보되지 않아 측정된 점수를 두 집단에서 직접 비교하는 것에는 신중해야 함을 보여주었다. 본 연구결과를 자기보고식 성격검사 활용과 관련하여 해석 시 고려사항을 중심으로 논의하였다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 한국산업인력공단 중앙고용정보원, "직업선호도검사 타당화 연구보고서" 조양비즈네스사 2001

2 정보라, "사회적 바람직성의 구인 탐색" 이화여자대학교 2005

3 홍세희, "구조방정식 모형의 적합도 지수 선정기준과 그 근거" 19 : 161-177, 2000

4 Costa, P. T., "Work and personality: Use of the NEO-PI-R, In 16PF fifth edition, technical manual" Institute for Personality and Ability Testing 1996

5 McFarland, L. A., "Variance in faking across noncognitive measures" 83 (83): 812-821, 2000

6 Paulhus, D. L., "Two-component models of socially desirable responding" 46 : 598-609, 1984

7 Edwards, A. L., "The social desirability variable in personality assessment and research" ryden 1957

8 Edwards, A. L., "The relationship between the judged desirability of a trait and the probability that the trait will be endorsed" 37 : 90-93, 1953

9 Hui, C. H., "The instability of response sets" 49 : 253-260, 1985

10 Montag, I., "The five-factor personality model in applied setting" 8 : 1-11, 1994

11 Orpen, C., "The fakability of the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule in personnel selection" 23 : 1-4, 1971

12 Ones, D. S., "The effects of social desirability and faking on personality and integrity assessment for personnel selection" 11 : 245-269, 1998

13 Michaelis, W., "The determination of personality inventory factor patterns and intercorrelations by changes in real-life motivation" 118 : 223-234, 1971

14 Gough, H. G., "The California Psychological Inventory manual" Consulting Psychologists Press 1996

15 Smith, D. B., "The Big Five in personnel selection: Reexamining the effects of applicants' frame of reference on construct validity" 2001

16 Smith, D. B., "The Big Five in personnel selection: Reexamining frame of reference effects" University of Maryland 1996

17 Schmit, M. J., "The Big Five in personnel selection : Factor structure in applicant and nonapplicant population" 78 : 966-974, 1993

18 Smith, D. B., "Substance versus style : A new look at social desirability in motivating contexts" 87 : 211-218, 2002

19 Cohen, "Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences" Lawrence Earlbaum Associates 1988

20 Montag, I., "Stability of major personality factors under changing motivational conditions, In Replication research in the social sciences" Sage 253-262, 1990

21 Paulhus, D. L., "Socially desirable responding: The evolution of a construct, In The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement" Lawrence Erlbaum 49-69, 2002

22 Zerbe, W. J., "Socially desirable responding in organizational behavior : A reconcep-tion" 12 : 250-264, 1987

23 McCrae, R. R., "Social desirability scales : More substance than style" 51 : 882-888, 1983

24 Bartlett, C. J., "Social desirability response differences under research, simulated selection, and faking instructional sets" 20 : 281-288, 1967

25 Dunnett, S., "Social desirability in the Eysenck Personality Inventory" 72 : 19-26, 1981

26 Sackeim, H. A., "Self-deception, other-deception and consciousness, In Consciousness and self-regulation: Advances in research Vol.2" Plenum Press 139-197, 1978

27 Ones, D. S., "Role of social desirability in personality testing for personnel selection : The red herring" 81 : 660-679, 1996

28 Jackson, D. N., "Response styles on the MMPI : Comparison of clinical and normal samples" 65 : 285-299, 1962

29 Damarin, F., "Response styles and personality variables: A theoretical integration of multivariate research" Educational Testing Service 1965

30 Messick, S., "Response style and content measures from personality Inventories" 22 : 41-56, 1962

31 Cronbach, L. J., "Response sets and test validity" 6 : 475-494, 1946

32 Collins, J, M., "Race, job appli-cants, and the five factor model of personality : Implications for Black psychology, industrial/ organizational psychology, and the five-factor theory" 83 : 531-544, 1998

33 Lyons, J., "Psychology and the measure of man" Free Press of Glencoe 1963

34 Messick. S., "Psychology and methodology of response styles, In Improving inquryes in social science" Erlbaum 161-200, 1991

35 Robie, C., "Measurement equivalence between applicant and incumbent groups : An IRT analysis of personality scales" 14 (14): 187-207, 2001

36 Paulhus, D. L., "Manual for the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding(BIDR-7)" Multi-Health systems 1998

37 Ellingson, J. E., "Investigating the Influence of Social Desirability on Personality Factor Structure" 86 : 122-133, 2001

38 Wiggins, J. S., "Interrelationships among MMPI measures of dissimulation under standard and social desirability instructions" 23 : 419-427, 1959

39 Griffith, R., "Faking of non-cognitive selection devices: Red herring is hard to swallow" University of Akron 1997

40 Frei, R. L., "Faking of non-cognitive measures: Factor invariance using multiple-groups LISREL" 1997

41 Thornton, G. C. Ⅲ., "Faka-bility of an empirically derived selection instrument" 44 : 48-51, 1980

42 Paulhus, D. L., "Effects of self-presentation strategies on personality profiles and their structure" 21 : 100-108, 1995

43 Barrick, M. B., "Effects of impression management and self-deception on the predictive validity of personality constructs" 81 (81): 261-272, 1996

44 Hough, L. M., "Criterion-related validities of personality constructs and the effect of response distortion on those validities [Monograph]" 75 : 581-595, 1990

45 Wiggns, J. S., "Convergences among stylistic response measures from objective personality tests" 24 : 551-562, 1964

46 Paulhus, D. L., "Control of social desirability in personality inventories : Principal-factor deletion" 15 : 383-388, 1981

47 Arbuckle, J. L., "Amos 4. 0 User's guide" SPSS Inc 1999

48 Sticker, L. J., "Acquiescence and social desirability response styles; item characteristics, and conformity" 12 : 319-341, 1963

49 Dunnette, M. D., "A study of faking behavior on a forced-choice self-description checklist" 15 : 13-24, 1962

50 Kirchner, W. K., ""Real-life"faking on the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule by sales applicants" 46 : 128-140, 1962