1. The Construct of Social Desirability
Social desirability describes the tendency of individuals to respond in surveys or tests in a way that is socially acceptable rather than honest—often due to fear of negative consequences or rejection. This effect appears both in everyday life (e.g., when asked about alcohol or media consumption) and in critical decision-making situations, such as personnel selection. In such high-stakes contexts, responses may be deliberately crafted to influence outcomes in one’s own favor and avoid potential disadvantages.
2. Forms of Social Desirability
Social desirability is evident not only in various situations—such as surveys, job interviews, or daily life—but also in different forms. Below is a compact overview of the most common distortions:
Faking good vs. Faking bad
Faking good refers to the intentional portrayal of oneself in a more favorable light, e.g., during job applications. Faking bad involves deliberately downplaying positive traits or exaggerating negative ones, such as pretending to be overwhelmed to be assigned less demanding tasks.
Underreporting vs. Overreporting
Underreporting means concealing or downplaying undesirable behaviors (e.g., hiding the actual time spent on a task to appear more efficient). Overreporting refers to exaggerating or fabricating socially desirable behaviors (e.g., calling an internship a “project management role” to appear more competent).
Impression Management vs. Self-Deception
Impression management is the deliberate deception of others by presenting a strategically enhanced self-image (e.g., staying late at the office for appearances, without actually working). Self-deception is a form of unintentional self-misrepresentation where a person believes their own idealized image (e.g., thinking of oneself as open and fair, while others perceive their communication as authoritarian).
3. Social Desirability and Assessments
Assessments are designed to capture traits, abilities, or attitudes with varying levels of specificity—but always authentically. Honesty and authenticity are essential for making valid decisions based on assessment results. Unsurprisingly, respondents who answer in line with social norms not only distort their test results (e.g., personality or ability profiles), but may also cause issues depending on how the assessment is used.
Distortion of Test Results
This distortion is highly relevant for test design and evaluation. If there’s a strong tendency toward socially desirable responding, the test no longer measures the intended construct, but rather the extent to which a person conforms to social norms.
Reduced Predictive Validity
When incorrect information is gathered, the predictive validity of the construct is weakened, and its practical usefulness declines. For instance, a high personality score relevant to job success may be misleading if it is based on socially desirable answers. The test may then fail to accurately predict actual job performance.
In addition to general distortions that negatively impact result interpretation and utility, there are specific problems especially relevant in personnel contexts:
Shifting of Candidate Rankings
Assessment scores are often used to rank candidates. If some individuals respond in a socially desirable manner (e.g., presenting inflated skill levels), while others answer truthfully, the rankings may become skewed. As a result, more qualified candidates may drop in rank, while less qualified ones rise.
Loss of Comparability Between Individuals/Test Results
Not only rankings but also direct comparisons between candidates or test scores are used to assess suitability. Socially desirable responses limit or eliminate this comparability, making it harder to distinguish between candidates effectively.
Incorrect Hiring Decisions and Higher Turnover
These distortions can lead to poor hiring decisions. If personality or ability traits are misrepresented, the resulting mismatch can lead to early turnover, even if the candidate passed the assessment. Without recognizing this issue, decision-makers may hire candidates based on misleading data.
4. Preventing the Effects of Social Desirability in Assessments
Although there is no universal solution to completely eliminate social desirability bias, there are ways to reduce its likelihood:
Providing Anonymity and Confidentiality
Assuring participants from the start that responses are anonymous and confidential can reduce fears of negative consequences and lower the tendency to answer in a socially desirable manner.
Transparent and Honest Communication
Being clear about the purpose of the assessment—such as emphasizing that participation is solely for development and not linked to negative outcomes—can encourage more honest responses.
Using Behavioral Instead of Attitudinal Questions
Abstract questions about opinions or attitudes are more likely to trigger socially desirable responses. Replacing them with behavioral questions based on concrete actions or experiences leads to more authentic answers. Instead of asking, “Do you consider yourself a team player?” a better question would be, “How often do you offer help to colleagues even when it’s not part of your job?”
Using Validation and Control Questions
Validation questions ask about similar topics from different perspectives, allowing inconsistencies to reveal tendencies toward social desirability. For example, “I always follow the rules” might be validated with “Sometimes you have to break the rules to work efficiently.”
Control questions are items that very few people would truthfully endorse completely. For example: “I have never lied to anyone.” Strong agreement here could signal a socially desirable response style.
Multiple Rating Sources: 360-Degree Feedback
Conducting 360-degree feedback—where not only the individual but also colleagues and supervisors provide input—helps minimize social desirability bias. A single person has less influence on the result when it is balanced by multiple perspectives.
For more, see the article series: Subjectivity in 360 Assessments.
Conclusion
Social desirability is one of the key challenges in conducting assessments. Such biases can significantly affect the validity of results, leading to misinterpretation and even poor decisions. Importantly, socially desirable responding is not always a conscious attempt to deceive—it is often an unconscious adaptation to perceived social expectations. Therefore, it’s crucial to be aware of these effects and to apply appropriate countermeasures—such as validated question formats and control mechanisms—to maintain the quality of assessment outcomes.