arbiter
JournalsAccount

Strategic misrepresentation in personality testing: An experimental study using the public goods game

D. C. Woods

Judgment and Decision Making2026https://doi.org/10.1017/jdm.2026.10031article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Personality tests are commonly used to hire suitable employees but this process is susceptible to strategic misrepresentation by job-seekers. This article uses a lab experiment as an analogy of such a hiring process by using a repeated public goods game (PGG) as a proxy for a cooperative work environment. Participants first complete a Big Five personality test, focusing on the trait of ‘Agreeableness’, which some previous studies have associated with prosocial cooperation in the PGG. Two groups are formed: a high Agreeableness group and a low Agreeableness group. The experiment manipulates the timing of revealing the group formation rule, as knowing the rule before the personality test allows for misrepresentation of Agreeableness. I find no evidence of substantial misrepresentation when the group formation rule is revealed before the personality test. I do find that Agreeableness group formation increases contributions for both high and low groups, but only when it is described to participants before the PGG. I find no evidence that Agreeableness is related to contributions in the PGG.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/jdm.2026.10031

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{d.2026,
  title        = {{Strategic misrepresentation in personality testing: An experimental study using the public goods game}},
  author       = {D. C. Woods},
  journal      = {Judgment and Decision Making},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/jdm.2026.10031},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Strategic misrepresentation in personality testing: An experimental study using the public goods game

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.