Results and Comments
The BIDR has undergone substantial change through its evolution from editions 1 through 7. The nature of
content has shifted from rather psychologically threatening issues to the current range of content. Substantial evi-
dence has been provided for the two primary dimensions of Self-Deceptive Enhancement and Impression
Management. Although not all studies have supported their independence, continued research into the
dimensionality of measures of social desirability responding seems warranted. The evidence remains mixed, and
resolution of the methods of scoring the BIDR-7 would help by removing one confounding variable.
On a related front, Paulhus and colleagues (Blasberg, Rogers, & Paulhus, in press) have developed a new ques-
tionnaire measuring Impression Management, the Bi-Dimensional Impression Management Inventory (BIMI). That
questionnaire does not aim at identifying individual faking, but rather measures the evaluativeness of personality
questionnaires and the demands that a specific situation might elicit, thereby showing whether an instrument is
more loaded with agentic or communal aspects. Additionally, the BIMI can be used to specify whether a situation
has a higher demand for agentic or for communal behavior that makes faking in the specific direction more
likely. This use of a social desirability scale is highly innovative in its use for situations rather than individuals.
Marlowe /C0Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSDS)
(Crowne & Marlowe, 1960 ).
Variable
The MCSDS measures socially desirable responding through the self-report assessment of culturally approved
and sanctioned behavior that occurs infrequently. Paulhus (1991) reviewed the earlier literature on the MCSDS
(cf.Paulhus, 1991 , pp. 27 /C031). We focus on the more recent literature here.
Description
The MCSDS normative data are from over 50 years ago, and many short forms have been developed (see
Fischer & Fick, 1993 , for an analysis of some short forms). The scale and its numerous short forms have also been
translated into various languages. Ballard, Crino, and Rubenfeld (1988) raised concerns over the continued appli-
cability of about one third of the scoring key of MCSDS items due to changes in the social acceptability of those
items’ content over the years.
Sample
With a sample of 402 Canadian undergraduates, Holden and Fekken (1989) reported a mean MCSDS score of
15.61 ( SD55.33). This score is about two points higher than the original normative values reported by Marlowe
and Crowne (1960).
Reliability
Internal Consistency
Holden and Fekken (1989) reported a Cronbach alpha coefficient of .78 ( N5402), Helmes and Holden (2003)
reported an alpha coefficient of .74 ( N5202), and Holden and Passey (2010) reported an alpha coefficient of .81
(N5602). Beretvas, Meyers, and Leite (2002) reported alpha coefficients of .80 for women and .70 for men from
their reliability generalizability study.
Test/C0Retest
For a sample of 60 university students, Crino, Svoboda, Rubenfeld, and White (1983) reported a test /C0retest
correlation of .86 for a one-month interval. The latter stability correlation was the highest reported by Beretvas
et al. (2002) for the 21 test /C0retest reliability coefficients that they reported, too few for a reliability generalization
analysis. The lowest coefficient that they reported was .38 over a two- to four-week period.
Validity
Convergent/Concurrent
For a sample of 202 university students, Helmes and Holden (2003) reported that the MCSDS score correlated
.63 and.53 with the IM and SDE scale scores, respectively, of the BIDR-7 ( Paulhus, 1998 ). They also reported a
correlation of .57 with the Denial scale score of Jackson’s (1989) Basic Personality Inventory . Furthermore, Holden24 2. RESPONSE BIAS, MALINGERING, AND IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT
I. INTRODUCTION: CORE ISSUES IN ASSESSMENT