• Milan Oljača Department of psychology, Faculty of philosophy, University of Novi Sad
  • Bojan Branovački Department of psychology, Faculty of philosophy, University of Novi Sad
  • Selka Sadiković Department of psychology, Faculty of philosophy, University of Novi Sad



social desirability bias, dimensional perspective, typological perspective, VP 2, Unlikely virtues


Main goal of this research is examination of social desirability bias (SDB), and its relation to dimensions and types of personality. Study was carried out on 1322 (76% female) participants, aged from 18 to 72 years (M = 33.63). IPIP simulation of Unlikely virtues (Uv) scale, questionnaire operationalisation of social desirability bias, and short version of VP + 2, questionnaire operationalisation of seven lexical dimensions in Serbian language, were administered. Latent class analysis was conducted in shared latent space of dimensions of VP + 2 and Uv. Bayesian information criterion indicates that the optimal solution consists of three personality types: Unadapted, Resilient and Constrained. Results are in accordance with assumptions about relations between social desirability bias and personality types. Resilient type scores moderately high on SDB, constrained type scores average, whilst unadapted type achieves moderately lowered scores on SDB. In order to examine relations between SDB and personality dimensions, gender, age and education status, analysis of covariance was applied. Results of this research confirm findings from previous research about relations between SDB and Five factor model personality dimensions, but also indicated the importance of the evaluative dimensions in understanding SDB.


Metrics Loading ...


Alessandri, G., Vecchione, M., Donnellan, B. M., Eisenberg, N., Caprara, G., & Cieciuch, J. (2013). On the cross-cultural replicability of the resilient, undercontrolled, and overcontrolled personality types. Journal of Personality, 82, 340‒353. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12065
Almagor, M., Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. G. (1995). The Big Seven Model: A crosscultural replication and further exploration of the basic dimensions of natural language trait descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 300–307. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.69.2.300
Asendorpf, J. B., Borkenau, P., Ostendorf, F., & van Aken, M. A. G. (2001). Carving personality description at its joints: confirmation of three replicable personality prototypes for both children and adults. European Journal of Personality, 15, 169–198. doi: 10.1002/per.408
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., de Vries, R. E., Perugini, M., Gnisci, A., & Sergi, I. (2006). The HEXACO model of personality structure and indigenous lexical personality dimensions in Italian, Dutch, and English. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 851–875. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2005.06.003
Benet, V., & Waller, N. G. (1995). The Big Seven Factor Model of personality description: Evidence for its cross-cultural generality in a Spanish sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psyshology, 69, 701–718. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.701
Block, J. (1965). The challenge of response sets. New York: Appleton Century-Crofts.
Bollen, K. A. (2002). Latent variables in psychology and the social sciences. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 605–634. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901. 135239.
Branovački, B. i Sadiković, S. (2017). Primena i validacija SAPA tehnologije na srpskom uzorku. Prezentovano na naučno-stručnom skupu Savremeni trendovi u psihologiji, Novi Sad, Srbija.
Caspi, A., & Silva, P. A. (1995). Temperamental qualities at age three predict personality traits in young adulthood: Longitudinal evidence from a birth cohort. Child Development, 66, 486‒498. doi: 10.2307/1131592
Chapman, B. P., & Goldberg, L. R. (2011). Replicability and 40-year predictive power of childhood ARC types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 593‒606. doi: 10.1037/a0024289
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. doi: 10.4324/9780203771587
Costa, P. T., Herbst, J. H., McCrae, R. R., Samuels, J., & Ozer, D. J. (2002). The replicability and utility of three personality types. European Journal of Personality, 16, 73‒87. doi: 10.1002/per.448
Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349–354. doi: 10.1037/h0047358
Čolović P., Smererevac, S. i Mitrović, D. (2014). Velikih pet plus dva: validacija skraćene verzije. Primenjena psihologija 7(dodatak), 227‒254. doi: 10.19090/pp.2014.3-1.227-254
Čolović, P., Jordanov, M. i Nenadić, F. (2014). Tipovi ličnosti u okviru modela velikih pet: poređenje rešenja dobijenih klaster analizom i analizom latentnih profila. Primenjena psihologija, 2, 203–219. doi: 10.19090/pp.2015.2.203-219
De Vries, R. E., Zettler, I., & Hilbig, B. E. (2013). Rethinking Trait Conceptions of Social Desirability Scales. Assessment, 21, 286–299. doi:10.1177/1073191113504619
Edwards, A. L. (1957). The social desirability variable in personality assessment and research. New York: Dryden Press.
Fraley, C., & Raftery, A. E. (2002). Model-Based Clustering, Discriminant Analysis, and Density Estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 97(458), 611–631. doi: 10.1198/016214502760047131
Furnham, A. (1997). The Psychology of Behaviour at Work. Hove: Psychology Press.
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative" description of personality": the Big-five factor structure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 59(6), 1216–1229. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.59.6.1216
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. C. (2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007
Herzberg, P., & Roth, M. (2006). Beyond resilients, undercontrollers, and overcontrollers? An extension of personality prototype research. European Journal of Personality, 20, 5–28. doi: 10.1002/per.557
Hogan, R., & Nicholson, R. A. (1988). The meaning of personality test scores. American Psychologist, 43, 621–626. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.43.8.621
Holden, R. R., & Passey, J. (2010). Socially desirable responding in personality assessment: Not necessarily faking and not necessarily substance. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(5), 446‒450. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.04.015
Hurtz, G. M., & Alliger, G. M. (2002). Influence of Coaching on Integrity Test Performance and Unlikely Virtues Scale Scores. Human Performance, 15(3), 255–273. doi: 10.1207/S15327043HUP1503_02
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research 2 (pp. 102‒138). New York: Guilford Press.
John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative big five trait taxonomy. Handbook of personality: Theory and research, 3, 114‒158.
Kurtz, J. E., Tarquini, S. J., & Iobst, E. A. (2008). Socially desirable responding in personality assessment: Still more substance than style. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(1), 22-27. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2008.02.012
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2016). Psychometric Properties of the HEXACO-100. Assessment, 1–15. doi:10.1177/1073191116659134
Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., & Whiteman, M. C. (2003). Personality Traits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1983). Social desirability scales: More substance than style. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51(6), 882–888. doi: 10.1037//0022-006X.51.6.882
Mervielde, I., & Asendorpf, J. (2000). Variable-centered and person-centered approaches to childhood personality. Advances in Personality Psychology, 1, 37‒76.
Ones, D., Viswesvaran, C., Vish, D., & Reiss, A. (1996). The Role of Social Desirability in Personality Testing for Personnel Selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 660–679. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.660
Patrick, C. J., Curtin, J. J., & Tellegen, A. (2002). Development and validation of a brief form of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire. Psychological assessment, 14(2), 150. doi: 10.1037//1040-3590.14.2.150
Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/b978-0-12-590241-0.50006-x
Paulhus, D. L. (2002). Socially desirable responding: The evolution of a construct. In H. I. Braun, D. L. Jackson, && D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of psychological constructs in psychological and educational measurement (pp. 49–69). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Paunonen, S. V., & LeBel, E. P. (2012). Socially desirable responding and its elusive effects on the validity of personality assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(1), 158–175. doi: 10.1037/a0028165
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717–731. doi: 10.3758/BF03206553
Robins, R. W., John, O. P., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1996). Resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled boys: Three replicable personality types. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 157–171. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.70.1.157
Roth, M., & Herzberg, P. Y. (2007). The resilient type: ‘Simply the best’ or merely an artifact of social desirability? Psychology Science, 49(2), 150–167.
Roth, M., & von Collani, G. (2007). A head-to-head comparison of Big-Five types and traits in the prediction of social attitudes: Further evidence for a five-cluster typology. Journal of Individual Differences, 28, 138–149. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001.28.3.138
Sadiković. S., Fesl, D. i Čolović, P. (2016). Tipovi ličnosti na novoj teritoriji: analiza latentnih profila u prostoru tri psiholeksička modela ličnosti. Primenjena psihologija, 9, 41–61. doi: 10.19090/pp.2016.1.41-61
Schnabel, K., Asendorpf, J. B., & Ostendorf, F. (2002). Replicable types and subtypes of personality: German NEO PI-R versus NEO-FFI. European Journal of Personality, 16, 7‒24. doi: 10.1002/per.445
Scrucca, L., Fop, M., Murphy, T. B., & Raftery, A. E. (2016). mclust 5: Clustering, Classification and Density Estimation Using Gaussian Finite Mixture Models. The R Journal, 8(1), 289–317.
Smederevac, S., Mitrović, D., & Čolović, P. (2007). The structure of the lexical personality descriptors in Serbian language. Psihologija, 40, 485–508. doi: 10.2298/psi0704485s
Smith, D. B., & Ellingson, J. E. (2002). Substance versus style: a new look at social desirability in motivating contexts. The Journal of applied psychology, 87(2), 211–219. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.87.2.211
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics, 6th ed. Boston: Pearson.
Tellegen, A. (1982). Brief manual for the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
Tellegen, A. (1995/2003). Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire–276 (MPQ-276) test booklet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Uziel, L. (2010). Rethinking Social Desirability Scales: From Impression Management to Interpersonally Oriented Self-Control. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 5(3), 243–262. doi: 10.1177/1745691610369465
Waller, N. G. (1999). Evaluating the structure of personality. In C. R. Cloninger (Ed.), Personality and psychopathology (pp. 155–197). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
Wiggins, J. S. (1973). Personality and prediction: Principles of personality assessment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Zerbe, W. J., & Paulhus, D. L. (1987). Socially desirable responding in organizational behavior: A reconception. Academy of Management Review, 12, 250–264.




How to Cite

Oljača, M., Branovački, B., & Sadiković, S. (2018). SOCIAL DESIRABILITY BIAS AND PERSONALITY STRUCTURE - DIMENSIONAL AND TYPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES. Primenjena Psihologija, 11(1), 69–87.



Regular issues