Abstract
ABSTRACTIn two experiments, the impact of faking on the affect misattribution procedure (AMP) was examined. Results revealed that faking influences both the overall means and the convergent validity of AMP effects in terms of correlations with self-report measures. Faking effects were very selective in that they affected fake-prime trials only, for which AMP effects were significant, but reversed in direction, while AMP effects for non-fake trials remained intact. Importantly, neither strategic advice nor prior task experience was a necessary prerequisite for successful faking. The discussion focuses on possible processes underlying successful faking in the AMP.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call