Reliability and Validity of Personal Interviews

Reliability and Validity of Personal Interviews Reliability and Validity of Personal Interviews as a Selection Technique In the Introduction define or identify the general topic, issue, or area of concern, thus providing an appropriate context for reviewing the literature. In order to provide an appropriate context for this reviewing literature, it is necessary identify which is the framework of personal interviews as a selection technique,   and what is the definitions for this XXX tool, as well as the concepts of reliability an validity. En el à ¡mbito de la Psicologà ­a de las Organizaciones y mà ¡s concretamente en seleccià ³n de personal uno de los instrumentos que rara vez està ¡ ausente en cualquier proceso selectivo es la denominada `entrevista de seleccià ³n de personal ´, haciendo con ello referencia a la rela ià ³n de dià ¡logo que se establece entre do o mà ¡s personas, con la finalidad de obtener informacià ³n y evaluar las cualidades del candidato a un puesto de trabajo (Dipboye, 1992). De las distintas herramientas utilizadas en el proceso de seleccià ³n, la entrevista de trabajo aparece como la mà ¡s empleada (Muchinsky, 1986; Levy-Leboyer, 1990), muy por encima, con diferencia, del resto (referencias, tests, centros de evaluacià ³n, datos biogrà ¡ficos, grafologà ­a). La entrevista de trabajo es la fase definitiva, dentro de cualquier proceso de bà ºsqueda de empleo o de cambio de trabajo. Todos los pasos anteriores como la toma de informacià ³n, preparacià ³n, envà ­o, de la carta de presentacià ³n y seguimiento de currà ­culo, han estado dirigidos a conseguir una entrevista de seleccià ³n con la empresa. Es el momento del contacto personal, donde de una forma individual y directa, el entrevistado tiene la ocasià ³n de convencer al entrevistador de que à ©l es la persona idà ³nea para el puesto. Nos jugamos mucho en poco tiempo. In the field of Personnel selection is a process used by organizations (companies, institutions, organs of public administration, etc.) decide which of the aspirants for a particular position is the most appropriate. In other words, personnel selection is a decision-making process about the suitability of the candidates for vacant positions. The instruments that can be employed in the selection process are extremely numerous, and include: application forms, curriculum vitae, employment records, interviews, cognitive skills tests, psychomotor skills tests, personality tests and questionnaires, simulations (group dynamics, in-basket tests, business games, etc.), work-sample tests, references, and so on. Various processes are used to identify the most promising candidates; generally more than one process is used. Most organisations ask for a rà ©sumà © or job application from all candidates. A selected group of candidates is then invited to attend an interview, a system of tests, or an assessment centre, or some combination of these. En el à ¡mbito de la Psicologà ­a de las Organizaciones y mà ¡s concretamente en seleccià ³n de personal uno de los instrumentos que rara vez està ¡ ausente en cualquier proceso selectivo es la denominada `entrevista de seleccià ³n de personal ´,haciendo con ello referencia a la rela ià ³n de dià ¡logo que se establece entre do o mà ¡s personas, con la finalidad de obtener informacià ³n y evaluar las cualidades del candidato a un puesto de trabajo (Dipboye, 1992). En este sentido, resulta paradà ³jico que, mientras los datos acumulados a travà ©s de diferentes investigaciones, tanto cuantitativas como cualitativas, ponà ­an de manifiesto que las propiedades psicomà ©tricas de la Entrevista de Seleccià ³n resultan dà ©biles, mostrando bajos coeficientes de fiabilidad, asà ­ como una validez de criterio muy reducida (Wagner, 1949; Mayfield, 1964; Ulrich y Trumbo, 1965; Wright, 1969; Schmitt, 1976; Arvey y Campion, 1982; Reilly y Chao, 1982; Hunter y Hunter, 1984), constituà ­a uno de los recursos de seleccià ³n mà ¡s utilizados tanto en Europa como en Amà ©rica. Las razones que explican el uso intensivo de esta herramienta, a pesar de su debilidad psicomà ©trica, probablemente se deban a un efecto de validez aparente subyacente (Goodale, 1982). Sin embargo, a partir de la dà ©cada de 1980 comienzan a aparecer nuevos modelos de entrevistas de seleccià ³n, cuyas caracterà ­sticas en tà ©rminos de estructura y contenido son de naturaleza claramente distinta. Las investigaciones realizadas para determinar las propiedades psicomà ©tricas arrojan unos valores similares a los tests cognitivos en cuanto a fiabilidad y valores mà ¡s que aceptables en cuanto a validez (Anderson, 1992; Campion, Palmer y Campion, 1997; Harris, 1989; Huffcutt y Arthur, 1994; McDaniel, Whetzel, Schmidt y Maurer, 1994; Salgado y Moscoso, 1995; Wiesner y Cronshaw, 1988). De acuerdo con estas investigaciones, elincremento de tamaà ±o de los coeficientes psicomà ©tricos, estarà ­a relacionado por una parte, con el aumento del grado de estructuracià ³n de las preguntas y, por otra parte,con la incorporacià ³n de contenidos relativos a la exploracià ³n o bà ºsqueda de conductas relevantes para el desempeà ±o del puesto. point out overall trends in what has been published about the topic; or conflicts in theory, methodology, evidence, and conclusions; or gaps in research and scholarship; or a single problem or new perspective of immediate interest. establish the writers reason (point of view) for reviewing the literature; explain the criteria to be used in analysing and comparing literature and the organisation of the review (sequence); and, when necessary, state why certain literature is or is not included (scope). En el à ¡mbito de la Psicologà ­a de las Organizaciones y mà ¡s concretamente en seleccià ³n de personal uno de los instrumentos que rara vez està ¡ ausente en cualquier proceso selectivo es la denominada `entrevista de seleccià ³n de personal, haciendo con ello referencia a la relacià ³n de dià ¡logo que se establece entre dos o mà ¡s personas, con la finalidad de obtener informacià ³n y evaluar las cualidades del candidato a un puesto de trabajo (Dipboye, 1992). 1. Various processes are used to identify the most promising candidates; generally more than one process is used. Most organisations ask for a rà ©sumà © or job application from all candidates. A selected group of candidates is then invited to attend an interview, a system of tests, or an assessment centre, or some combination of these. One of the best ways of identifying whether someone is going to be an effective member of staff is to work with them for a period. Thus, inviting university students to work during their vacations enables you to assess them thoroughly in the working environment, or you can make an offer to a contractor who has impressed you with their work. But for most hiring, it is necessary to assess candidates by more artificial methods. There are two criteria which selection techniques need to meet if they are to be useful in predicting performance: Validity: Does a factor which is used in selection-for example, educational level or experience-actually predict job performance? Reliability: Does a selection technique produce consistent results? For example, a test in which the same person obtained the same score on a number of occasions would be considered more reliable than a test on which the same person obtained different scores on different occasions. Unfortunately, there is usually a trade-off between validity and reliability. It is simple to devise a test of high reliability which has little predictive value; and tests of the factors which do predict job performance are often subjective and thus unreliable. However, it is much better to have a valid test of limited reliability than a reliable test of little validity-at least a valid test tells us something. For example, it is easy to test if someone can do calculus, or can understand a set of technical terms. It is not easy to devise a reliable test which shows that a candidate can do innovative design, or persuade customers, or deal with difficult people, yet these kinds of ability are much more important in most jobs than highly specific knowledge which can be learned in a short time. 2. Personel selection ersonnel selection is a process through which organizations (companies, institutions, organs of public administration, etc.) decide which of the aspirants for a particular position is the most appropriate. In other words, personnel selection is a decision-making process about the suitability of the candidates for vacant positions. The instruments that can be employed in the selection process are extremely numerous, and include: application forms, curriculum vitae, employment records, interviews, cognitive skills tests, psychomotor skills tests, personality tests and questionnaires, simulations (group dynamics, in-basket tests, business games, etc.), work-sample tests, references, and so on. The particular instruments employed ultimately depend on the selection approach or model used by the organization in question. INSTRUMENTS USED IN PERSONNEL SELECTION Regardless of whether the selection model used is the traditional one or the strategic one, the appositeness of the recruitment decision will depend on the validity of the instruments used for making that decision. Hence, it is appropriate to review the latest data on the validity of the tools used, or with potential for use, by professionals involved in recruitment. At present, the most widely used method for reaching a conclusion on the validity of an instrument is meta-analysis, a quantitative technique of integration of research results (Hunter Schmidt, 2004). Today we have access to meta-analyses carried out to determine the validity and utility of nearly all the instruments employed in personnel selection (see Salgado, Viswesvaran Ones, 2001 and Schmidt Hunter, 1998, for a fuller review). b) Interview The interview is without doubt the most widely used instrument for personnel selection, both in Spain and in all the other countries for which such information is available. The conclusion of numerous studies is that practically 100% of those recruited for a position must get through at least one interview during the personnel selection process (Salgado et al., 2001). For this reason it is clear that the interview merits special consideration among the set of instruments used for personnel selection. Over the last 70 years there have been periodical reviews of research on the validity of the personnel selection interview. Up to 1987 there had been 7 large-scale reviews of the literature, all of them concluding that the interview was characterized by low reliability, that is, first, that two different interviewers scarcely coincided in their appreciations of an applicant, and second, that their validity was low or even zero, and that they contributed nothing to the prediction of performance obtained through other instruments, such as cognitive ability tests. This raised a significant paradox: easily the most widely used instrument for predicting candidates job performance was an instrument incapable of predicting it. How, then, could the widespread use of the interview be explained? Possible responses to this question include: (1) The interview is an easy instrument to use. Practically anyone can, apparently, use it without the need for any particular qualification; (2) It is a highly versatile instrument, since it can be applied to any position, organization or situation; (3) It is the best means of getting to know candidates personally; (4) It permits candidates to explain personally their merits in relation to the post; (5) It allows the applicant to be provided with personalized information about the organization; (6) It is relatively cheap by comparison with other selection instruments; and (7) It is more acceptable to both managers and applicants than other instruments potentially involved in selection processes. Such explanations, while sufficient for maintaining the interview among the selection instruments to be considered, do not constitute an argument for its use as a tool for making recruitment decisions. Even so, recent research has shown that, with certain characteristics and in certain conditions, the selection interview boasts reliability and validity, increases the validity of batteries of selection instruments and has appreciable economic advantages(Salgado Moscoso, 2005). It is the format (degree of structuring) of the interview that seems to most influence its lack of validity, and to remedy this situation several alternatives have been proposed, which would fall into the general category of structured behavioural interview (see Salgado Moscoso, 2005 for a fuller treatment of this type of interview). The main defining characteristics of structured behavioural interviews, as against conventional interviews, would be: (1) the questions making up the interview are developed based on jobs analysis, employing the Critical Incidents technique; (2) they involve questions whose content refers exclusively to behaviours in the relevant post; (3) each candidate is asked all the questions prepared; (4) the interview process is repeated with all the interviewees; (5) applicants responses are assessed by means of behavioural observation scales or rating scales with behavioural anchoring, also developed through jobs analysis (EVAS; see Salgado Moscoso, 2005, for a description of these scales). Moscoso(2000), reviewing the predictive validity of the personnel selection interview, was able to show that, compared to the case of other types, the structured behavioural interview presents a validity similar to that of the best instruments employed in personnel selection (e.g., cognitive ability tests), and even superior to that of some (such as personality measures or assessment centres). Recent studies carried out in Spain (Saez, 2007; Salgado, Gorriti Moscoso, 2007) have shown the validity of structured interviews applied in panel form to be .63, which indeed situates them among the best instruments for personnel selection. In recent years some studies have also been conducted with the aim of clarifying what the selection interview actually measures. For example, Salgado and Moscoso (2002) carried out a metaanalysis in which they classified interviews according to their degree of structuring: low-structure interviews (which would correspond to conventional interviews) and high-structure interviews (structured behavioural interviews). Their results showed that the two types of interview are related to different variables. Thus, conventional or low-structure interviews appear to be basically measuring general mental ability and personality characteristics, that is, when interviewers carry out this type of interview they focus on intrinsic factors of the candidate. However, highly structured or structured behavioural interviews principally measure knowledge about the job and work experience. Thus, such interviews concentrate on finding out whether the candidate would perform well in the job 1. AMETA The employment interview is a tenaciously popular but controversial selection method. In particular, reviewers of the interviewing literature repeatedly question the predictive validity of the employment interview (Arvey Campion, 1982; Mayfield, 1964; Milne, 1967; Reilly Chao, 1982; Rodger, 1952; Rowe, 1981; Schmitt, 1976; Ulrich Trumbo, 1965; Wagner, 1949; Webster, 1982; Wright, 1969). These reviewers of the interviewing literature have, however, aggregated interview validity coefficients in a subjective fashion, referred to as a narrative review by Hunter, Schmidt Jackson (1982), rather than utilizing an empirical approach. Specifically, these reviews do not adjust interview validity coefficients for differing sample sizes in each of the studies nor do they adjust for statistical artifacts such as sampling error, measurement error and restriction or range. As a result, conclusions drawn about the validity of interviews from narrative reviews may be misleading. Hunter et al. ( 1982) have advocated the use of meta-analytic techniques as a method of aggregating a number of validity studies while accounting for the abovementioned statistical artifacts. The purpose of this paper is to resolve some longstanding controversies in the interviewing literature by first presenting a model of the employment interview as a predictor of employment outcomes and then testing this model by subjecting a very large dataset of interview validity coefficients to meta-analytic procedures. In the Body group research studies and other types of literature (reviews, theoretical articles, case studies, etc.) according to common denominators such as qualitative versus quantitative approaches, conclusions of authors, specific purpose or objective, chronology, etc. summarise individual studies or articles with as much or as little detail as each merits according to its comparative importance in the literature, remembering that space (length) denotes significance. provide the reader with strong umbrella sentences at beginnings of paragraphs, signposts throughout, and brief so what summary sentences at intermediate points in the review to aid in understanding comparisons and analyses. In the Conclusion summarise major contributions of significant studies and articles to the body of knowledge under review, maintaining the focus established in the introduction. evaluate the current state of the art for the body of knowledge reviewed, pointing out major methodological flaws or gaps in research, inconsistencies in theory and findings, and areas or issues pertinent to future study. conclude by providing some insight into the relationship between the central topic of the literature review and a larger area of study such as a discipline, a scientific endeavour, or a profession. http://www.papelesdelpsicologo.es/english/1534.pdf PERSONNEL SELECTION IN INDUSTRY AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: FROM THE TRADITIONAL VIEW TO THE STRATEGIC VIEW b) Interview The interview is without doubt the most widely used instrument for personnel selection, both in Spain and in all the other countries for which such information is available. The conclusion of numerous studies is that practically 100% of those recruited for a position must get through at least one interview during the personnel selection process (Salgado et al., 2001). For this reason it is clear that the interview merits special consideration among the set of instruments used for personnel selection. Over the last 70 years there have been periodical reviews of research on the validity of the personnel selection interview. Up to 1987 there had been 7 large-scale reviews of the literature, all of them concluding that the interview was characterized by low reliability, that is, first, that two different interviewers scarcely coincided in their appreciations of an applicant, and second, that their validity was low or even zero, and that they contributed nothing to the prediction of perfo rmance obtained through other instruments, such as cognitive ability tests. This raised a significant paradox: easily the most widely used instrument for predicting candidates job performance was an instrument incapable of predicting it. How, then, could the widespread use of the interview be explained? Possible responses to this question include: (1) The interview is an easy instrument to use. Practically anyone can, apparently, use it without the need for any particular qualification; (2) It is a highly versatile instrument, since it can be applied to any position, organization or situation; (3) It is the best means of getting to know candidates personally; (4) It permits candidates to explain personally their merits in relation to the post; (5) It allows the MULTIPLE PREDICTION OF JOB PERFORMANCE BASED ON THE BEST INSTRUMENTS AND VARIABLES Once the validity of the different personnel selection instruments (variables) and methods is known, we can establish the maximum degree of prediction that can be achieved through the NEW CHALLENGES FOR PERSONNEL SELECTION IN SPAIN Having established the predictive capacity of personnel selection procedures, it is worth considering the challenges to be met in the coming years. In our view, research on personnel selection in Spain will have to provide responses in relation to three crucial aspects: (a) the possible effects of indirect discrimination in selection procedures; (b) the economic utility of the procedures, and (c) legal modifications in the public administration context and their consequences for selection. Let us briefly consider these three challenges facing selection. GENERAL CONCLUSION In recent years, both in Spain and the rest of Europe, substantial progress in research on personnel selection has been made, and many of the limitations that previously affected this area have been addressed. Today, professionals involved in personnel selection have at their disposal a vast arsenal of instruments and access to a large body of research that enables them to establish the validity of these instruments, thus allowing them to choose the most suitable ones in accordance with their specific needs. As a consequence of such progress, the work of these professionals has been strongly endorsed, and their role in organizations has become increasingly acknowledged and appreciated http://www.le.ac.uk/oerresources/psychology/psa/unit5/page_03.htm Entrevista de trabajo http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrevista_de_trabajo De las distintas herramientas utilizadas en el proceso de seleccià ³n, la entrevista de trabajo aparece como la mà ¡s empleada (Muchinsky, 1986; Levy-Leboyer, 1990), muy por encima, con diferencia, del resto (referencias, tests, centros de evaluacià ³n, datos biogrà ¡ficos, grafologà ­a). La entrevista de trabajo es la fase definitiva, dentro de cualquier proceso de bà ºsqueda de empleo o de cambio de trabajo. Todos los pasos anteriores como la toma de informacià ³n, preparacià ³n, envà ­o, de la carta de presentacià ³n y seguimiento de currà ­culo, han estado dirigidos a conseguir una entrevista de seleccià ³n con la empresa. Es el momento del contacto personal, donde de una forma individual y directa, el entrevistado tiene la ocasià ³n de convencer al entrevistador de que à ©l es la persona idà ³nea para el puesto. Nos jugamos mucho en poco tiempo. Las caracterà ­sticas definidoras de la entrevista de seleccià ³n son que: a) se realiza a partir de un anà ¡lisis de puestos, b) es uniforme para todos los candidatos, c) los entrevistadores poseen un alto grado de formacià ³n especà ­fica y d) la decisià ³n de contratacià ³n se realiza despuà ©s de haber desarrollado todas las entrevistas (Campion, Palmer y Campion, 1997). Tipos de entrevista [editar] Individual: està ¡ndar o formalizada, informal, de choque o tensià ³n. Tambià ©n puede ser para verificar alguna cosa en concreto de las que figuran en el curriculum; por ejemplo: para saber si es cierto que el candidato habla inglà ©s. Si se trata de un puesto importante puede haber, là ³gicamente, varias entrevistas individuales. Colectiva: varios entrevistadores. En este tipo de entrevista es bastante frecuente que haya un psicà ³logo de empresa. Para ambas: puede ser directiva, no directiva o mixta (la mà ¡s comà ºn). Ventajas e inconvenientes [editar] La buena utilizacià ³n de la entrevista confiere a esta grandes ventajas tales como la posibilidad de indagar en aspectos no medibles ni observables por otras tà ©cnicas, o conocer personalmente al candidato. Posee, ademà ¡s, una gran flexibilidad en cuanto al tiempo que se puede dedicar y al nà ºmero de personas que se pueden entrevistar por dà ­a, asà ­ como la gran cantidad de informacià ³n que se puede recoger (Hough y Osdwald, 2000). Pero presenta tambià ©n diversos inconvenientes, sobre todo los relativos al alto coste que supone el tiempo necesario para su preparacià ³n, realizacià ³n y anà ¡lisis de la informacià ³n (al igual que la mayorà ­a de las tà ©cnicas cualitativas, pero sobre todo a la falta de preparacià ³n y formacià ³n en su utilizacià ³n debido a su aparente facilidad, de manera que muchos empresarios o directivos se sienten capacitados para preguntar a los candidatos. La realidad, sin embargo, es que la tà ©cnica de entrevista es difà ­cil y compleja, requirià ©ndose una gran capacitacià ³n y experiencia en su manejo (Bretones y Rodrà ­guez, 2008). Junto con estos inconvenientes, debemos seà ±alar, ademà ¡s, su bajo nivel de generalizacià ³n con respecto a otras pruebas de recogida de informacià ³n (Hunter y Hunter, 1984, Harris, 1989) sobre el comportamiento futuro de los candidatos (mà ¡s baja que las pruebas profesionales, tests cognitivos, centros de evaluacià ³n o las referencias, por ejemplo). De hecho, en los distintos estudios psicomà ©tricos realizados en su aplicacià ³n en los procesos de seleccià ³n de personal, se muestran coeficientes de fiabilidad y validez moderados. Una de las estrategias para superar tales carencias en cuanto a su validez serà ­a formular las preguntas a modo de incidentes crà ­ticos ocurridos al candidato en otras experiencias anteriores (cuà ©ntenos una experiencia concreta sobre cà ³mo resolvià ³ un problema con un empleado, por ejemplo), bajo el supuesto de que las conductas pasadas pueden predecir conductas futuras. http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/pqdweb?TS=1270715376SST=4sid=1moreOptState=CLOSEDSSM=CSQ=%28%28LSU%28%7BINTERVIEWS%7D%29+OR+LSU%28%7BINTERVIEW%7D%29%29+AND+LSU%28%7BVALIDITY%7D%29%29clientId=20806SSI=7RQT=305 http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=L9ycFmx07DrRchbg8X4PJ9c6qyCJ8pWmPkRm2hW1yLtybbhmbk6j!450074560!-234547230?docId=5000120818 The employment interview: guaranteed improvement in reliability. Validity: Does a factor which is used in selection-for example, educational level or experience-actually predict job performance? Reliability: Does a selection technique produce consistent results? For example, References TOPIC: Reliability and Validity of Personal Interviews as a Selection Technique Research raises doubts about the VALIDITY and RELIABILITY of personal interviews as a selection technique INTRO DUCTION BACKGROUND Entrevista de Seleccià ³n http://www.aiteco.com/entrevis.htm#p4 La entrevista es, probablemente, el mà ©todo mà ¡s utilizado en la seleccià ³n de personal, al tiempo que es el elemento que, con frecuencia, tiene mà ¡s peso a la hora de tomar una decisià ³n respecto a la admisià ³n o no admisià ³n del candidato. A pesar de la profusià ³n de su uso,es uno de los instrumentos menos conocidos y peor utilizados de la seleccià ³n de personal. Por otra parte, las personas que la ponen en prà ¡ctica no tienen, frecuentemente, los conocimientos y destrezas necesarios para adoptar juicios à ºtiles respecto al candidato, ni utilizan una metodologà ­a que le permita obtener buenos resultados. La entrevista no ha demostrado, en general, poseer mucha validez, no obstante pensamos que debe seguir utilizà ¡ndose ya que, ademà ¡s de su funcià ³n selectiva, tiene otras de importancia tales como verificar la informacià ³n dada anteriormente por el candidato, presentar la organizacià ³n a à ©ste, establecer con el candidato una relacià ³n personal y dar a à ©ste la oportunidad de resolver algunas dudas respecto a su futuro trabajo. Por otra parte, la tà ©cnica de la entrevista de seleccià ³n puede ser realmente mejorada. En este sentido, numerosos estudios apuntan al formato a utilizar para incrementar la fiabilidad y validez de la misma. Hay que tener tambià ©n en cuenta que, normalmente, no debe de utilizarse como à ºnico elemento de evaluacià ³n, sino que debe acompaà ±arse con otros mà ©todos que completen la informacià ³n. Various processes are used to identify the most promising candidates; generally more than one process is used. Most organisations ask for a rà ©sumà © or job application from all candidates. A selected group of candidates is then invited to attend an interview, a system of tests, or an assessment centre, or some combination of these. There are two criteria which selection techniques need to meet if they are to be useful in predicting performance: Validity: Does a factor which is used in selection-for example, educational level or experience-actually predict job performance? Reliability: Does a selection technique produce consistent results? For example, a test in which the same person obtained the same score on a number of occasions would be considered more reliable than a test on which the same person obtained different scores on different occasions. POSITIVE ASPECTS XXXX NEGATIVE ASPECTS http://www.akronshrm.org/pdfs/Faking%20Interview.pdf   Faking interview.A Model of Faking Likelihood in the Employment Interview Structured interviews provide less opportunity for intentional distortion; however, some components of structure may actually increase faking. Finally, job candidates distort their responses in job desirable ways. The past research on IM in interviews has identified different tactics that job candidates may use to impress the interviewers. Job candidates may use IM tactics to present themselves in the best possible way without being dishonest or untruthful. For example, they may use self-promotion tactics to describe their existing job related credentials. Alternatively, job candidates might simply fake interview questions in order to provide the best answer. Moreover, many researchers suggest that people are surprisingly effective at convincingly faking their emotional expressions, attitudes, and even personality characteristics (DePaulo, 1992) and perceivers usually are unable to detect such faking (Barrick Mount, 1996; Furnham, 1986; McFarland Ryan, 2000; Sackett Harris, 1984; Sackett Wanek, 1996; Toris DePaulo, 1984). It could be argued that deceptive IM or faking represents a real threat to the validity of the interview. implies that deceptive IM does not add a constant to the scores of all applicants, but instead the relative standing of applicants and thus the predictive validity of the interview could be affected. On the other hand, some candidates might exaggerate a great deal about their responsibilities, skills, workrelated experiences during an interview. Faking in the Interview Impression management refers to the intentional distortion of responses to create a favorable impression and is distinguished from self-deception