Strategic Selves: Self-Presentation Theory and the Predictive Validity of Personality Tests

Self-presentation theory suggests people strategically adjust trait displays to meet evaluative goals, meaning faking can sometimes enhance the link between scores and real-world performance. We tested this in a large-scale military selection field experiment (N = 1,133) by manipulating the salience of self-presentation motives during personality assessment. We examined how varying the salience of self-presentation affects personality trait levels, convergent validity with low-stakes scores, and the ability to predict performance and career outcomes. Participants completed the same personality inventory under low, moderate, or high self-presentation. Despite trait score inflation, convergent validity with low-stakes benchmarks remained largely equivalent, and predictive validity was preserved or even enhanced under high-salience conditions. Notably, traits such as conscientiousness and extraversion showed stronger predictive utility when self-presentation motives were made explicit. These findings challenge the common view that response distortion inherently undermines test validity and instead suggest that motivated self-presentation may reflect context-relevant trait expression.