{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,1]],"date-time":"2026-09-01T18:17:50Z","timestamp":1788286670860,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":49,"publisher":"SAGE Publications","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,30]],"date-time":"2026-08-30T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1788048000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,30]],"date-time":"2026-08-30T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1788048000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/page\/policies\/text-and-data-mining-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["journals.sagepub.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Assessment"],"abstract":"<jats:p>\n                    Overclaiming (OC)\u2014the tendency to claim knowledge one does not possess\u2014is predominantly assessed through self-report Overclaiming Questionnaires (OCQs). However, exclusive reliance on OCQs raises concerns about mono-method bias, limiting our understanding of knowledge purporting as a broader psychological disposition. To reduce this bias, we investigated two additional indicators of knowledge purporting and examined their convergent validity with traditional OCQs. In our study (\n                    <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">N<\/jats:italic>\n                    \u2009=\u2009297), one of the new measures scored responses on fictional questions and the other captured discrepancies between self-rated knowledge and actual knowledge. Using latent variable analyses, we found modest convergent relations between the three indicators of knowledge purporting. Apart from these substantial levels of method-specific variance, we found differential relations with covariates, thereby challenging the validity and utility of any specific task class, including the predominantly used OCQs. We recommend that knowledge purporting measures must not be equated with the broader concept of knowledge purporting. While this study suggests that the concept of knowledge purporting may have some generality, it also shows that the methods used to investigate it matter more than they should. Future studies should consider the relationship between multivariate measures of knowledge purporting and further discrepancies between self-reports of knowledge and actual performance.\n                  <\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1177\/10731911261479975","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,30]],"date-time":"2026-08-30T15:40:27Z","timestamp":1788104427000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/sage-journals-update-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Complementary Indicators of Knowledge Purporting and Their Validity"],"prefix":"10.1177","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-3050-1848","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Benjamin","family":"Goecke","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Hector Research Institute of Education Sciences and Psychology, University of T\u00fcbingen, Germany"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Catherine","family":"Schittenhelm","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"M\u00fcnster University, Germany"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-7980-1166","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Oliver","family":"Wilhelm","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Ulm University, Germany"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"179","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,30]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_3_2_2_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ackerman P. L. Ellingsen V. J. (2014). Vocabulary overclaiming\u2014A complete approach: Ability personality self-concept correlates and gender differences. Intelligence 46 216\u2013227. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.intell.2014.07.003","DOI":"10.1016\/j.intell.2014.07.003"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Altgassen E. Geiger M. Wilhelm O. (2024). Do you mind a closer look? A jingle-jangle fallacy perspective on mindfulness. European Journal of Personality 38(2) 365\u2013387. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/08902070231174575","DOI":"10.1177\/08902070231174575"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_4_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Barber L. K. Barnes C. M. Carlson K. D. (2013). Random and systematic error effects of insomnia on survey behavior. Organizational Research Methods 16(4) 616\u2013649. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/1094428113493120","DOI":"10.1177\/1094428113493120"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_5_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Beauducel A. Herzberg P. Y. (2006). On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 13(2) 186\u2013203. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1207\/s15328007sem1302_2","DOI":"10.1207\/s15328007sem1302_2"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_6_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Bensch D. Maa\u00df U. Greiff S. Horstmann K. T. Ziegler M. (2019). The nature of faking: A homogeneous and predictable construct? Psychological Assessment 31(4) 532\u2013544. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/pas0000619","DOI":"10.1037\/pas0000619"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Bensch D. Paulhus D. L. Stankov L. Ziegler M. (2017). Teasing apart overclaiming overconfidence and socially desirable responding. Assessment 26 351\u2013363. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/1073191117700268","DOI":"10.1177\/1073191117700268"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Bentler P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin 107(2) 238\u2013246. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/0033-2909.107.2.238","DOI":"10.1037\/0033-2909.107.2.238"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_9_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Bing M. N. Kluemper D. Kristl Davison H. Taylor S. Novicevic M. (2011). Overclaiming as a measure of faking. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 116(1) 148\u2013162. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.obhdp.2011.05.006","DOI":"10.1016\/j.obhdp.2011.05.006"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_10_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Browne M. W. Cudeck R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research 21(2) 230\u2013258. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/0049124192021002005","DOI":"10.1177\/0049124192021002005"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_11_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Brunner M. Nagy G. Wilhelm O. (2012). A tutorial on hierarchically structured constructs: Hierarchically structured constructs. Journal of Personality 80(4) 796\u2013846. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1467-6494.2011.00749.x","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1467-6494.2011.00749.x"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_12_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Campbell D. T. Fiske D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin 56(2) 81\u2013105. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/h0046016","DOI":"10.1037\/h0046016"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_13_1","volume-title":"Essentials of psychological testing","author":"Cronbach L. J.","year":"1949","unstructured":"Cronbach L. J. (1949). Essentials of psychological testing. Harper & Brothers, Publishers."},{"key":"e_1_3_2_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Dunlop P. D. Bourdage J. S. de Vries R. E. Hilbig B. E. Zettler I. Ludeke S. G. (2017). Openness to (reporting) experiences that one never had: Overclaiming as an outcome of the knowledge accumulated through a proclivity for cognitive and aesthetic exploration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 113(5) 810\u2013834. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/pspp0000110","DOI":"10.1037\/pspp0000110"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_15_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Dunlop P. D. Bourdage J. S. de Vries R. E. McNeill I. M. Jorritsma K. Orchard M. Austen T. Baines T. Choe W.-K. (2020). Liar! Liar! (When stakes are higher): Understanding how the overclaiming technique can be used to measure faking in personnel selection. Journal of Applied Psychology 105(8) 784\u2013799. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/apl0000463","DOI":"10.1037\/apl0000463"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_16_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Feeney J. R. Goffin R. D. (2015). The overclaiming questionnaire: A good way to measure faking? Personality and Individual Differences 82 248\u2013252. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.paid.2015.03.038","DOI":"10.1016\/j.paid.2015.03.038"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_17_1","unstructured":"Franzen A. Mader S. (2019). Do phantom questions measure social desirability? Methods Data Analyses 13(1) 37\u201357. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.12758\/mda.2019.01"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Goecke B. Schroeders U. Zettler I. Schipolowski S. Golle J. Wilhelm O. (2022). The nomological net of knowledge self-reported knowledge and overclaiming in children. Journal of Personality Assessment 105: 702\u2013713. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/00223891.2022.2144332","DOI":"10.1080\/00223891.2022.2144332"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_19_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Goecke B. Staab M. Schittenhelm C. Wilhelm O. (2022). Stop worrying about multiple-choice: Fact knowledge does not change with response format. Journal of Intelligence 10(4) 1\u201322. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/jintelligence10040102","DOI":"10.3390\/jintelligence10040102"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_20_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Goecke B. Weiss S. Steger D. Schroeders U. Wilhelm O. (2020). Testing competing claims about overclaiming. Intelligence 81 1\u201311. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.intell.2020.101470","DOI":"10.1016\/j.intell.2020.101470"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_21_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Hoffmann A. Diedenhofen B. M\u00fcller S. (2022). The utility of overclaiming questionnaires depends on the fit between test content and application context. Current Psychology 42 29305\u201329315. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s12144-022-03934-x","DOI":"10.1007\/s12144-022-03934-x"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Hu L. Bentler P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 6(1) 1\u201355. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/10705519909540118","DOI":"10.1080\/10705519909540118"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_23_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"H\u00fcl\u00fcr G. Wilhelm O. Schipolowski S. (2011). Prediction of self-reported knowledge with over-claiming fluid and crystallized intelligence and typical intellectual engagement. Learning and Individual Differences 21(6) 742\u2013746. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.lindif.2011.09.006","DOI":"10.1016\/j.lindif.2011.09.006"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_24_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kam C. Risavy S. D. Perunovic W. Q. E. (2015). Using over-claiming technique to probe social desirability ratings of personality items: A validity examination. Personality and Individual Differences 74 177\u2013181. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.paid.2014.10.017","DOI":"10.1016\/j.paid.2014.10.017"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_25_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Little T. D. Cunningham W. A. Shahar G. Widaman K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 9(2) 151\u2013173. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1207\/S15328007SEM0902_1","DOI":"10.1207\/S15328007SEM0902_1"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_26_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ludeke S. G. Makransky G. (2016). Does the over-claiming questionnaire measure overclaiming? Absent convergent validity in a large community sample. Psychological Assessment 28(6) 765\u2013774. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/pas0000211","DOI":"10.1037\/pas0000211"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_27_1","volume-title":"Test theory: A unified treatment","author":"McDonald R. P.","year":"1999","unstructured":"McDonald R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Erlbaum."},{"key":"e_1_3_2_28_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"McNeish D. Wolf M. G. (2024). Direct discrepancy dynamic fit index cutoffs for arbitrary covariance structure models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 31(5) 835\u2013862. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/10705511.2024.2308005","DOI":"10.1080\/10705511.2024.2308005"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_29_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Meade A. W. Craig S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods 17(3) 437\u2013455. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/a0028085","DOI":"10.1037\/a0028085"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_30_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Merten T. (2025). The self-report fallacy: When diagnosis predominantly relies on subjective symptom report. Current Opinion in Psychology 65 Article 102096. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.copsyc.2025.102096","DOI":"10.1016\/j.copsyc.2025.102096"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_31_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Moshagen M. Hilbig B. E. Zettler I. (2014). Faktorenstruktur psychometrische Eigenschaften und Messinvarianz der deutschsprachigen Version des 60-Item HEXACO Pers\u00f6nlichkeitsinventars [Factor structure psychometric features and measurement invariance of the German version of the 60-item HEXACO personality inventory]. Diagnostica 60 86\u201397. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1026\/0012-1924\/a000112","DOI":"10.1026\/0012-1924\/a000112"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_32_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"M\u00fcller S. Moshagen M. (2018). Overclaiming shares processes with the hindsight bias. Personality and Individual Differences 134 298\u2013300. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.paid.2018.06.035","DOI":"10.1016\/j.paid.2018.06.035"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_33_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Musch J. Ostapczuk M. Klaiber Y. (2012). Validating an inventory for the assessment of egoistic bias and moralistic bias as two separable components of social desirability. Journal of Personality Assessment 94(6) 620\u2013629. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/00223891.2012.672505","DOI":"10.1080\/00223891.2012.672505"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_34_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Olaru G. Witth\u00f6ft M. Wilhelm O. (2015). Methods matter: Testing competing models for designing short-scale Big-Five assessments. Journal of Research in Personality 59 56\u201368. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jrp.2015.09.001","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jrp.2015.09.001"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_35_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Paulhus D. L. Harms P. D. Bruce M. N. Lysy D. C. (2003). The over-claiming technique: Measuring self-enhancement independent of ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84(4) 890\u2013904. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/0022-3514.84.4.890","DOI":"10.1037\/0022-3514.84.4.890"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_36_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Phillips D. L. Clancy K. J. (1972). Some effects of \u201csocial desirability\u201d in survey studies. American Journal of Sociology 77(5) 921\u2013940. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1086\/225231","DOI":"10.1086\/225231"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_37_1","unstructured":"R Core Team. (2025). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https:\/\/www.r-project.org\/"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_38_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Rammstedt B. Danner D. Bosnjak M. (2017). Acquiescence response styles: A multilevel model explaining individual-level and country-level differences. Personality and Individual Differences 107 190\u2013194. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.paid.2016.11.038","DOI":"10.1016\/j.paid.2016.11.038"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_39_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Rammstedt B. Kemper C. J. Borg I. (2013). Correcting big five personality measurements for acquiescence: An 18-country cross-cultural study. European Journal of Personality 27(1) 71\u201381. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/per.1894","DOI":"10.1002\/per.1894"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_40_1","first-page":"34","article-title":"An experimental study of some behavior traits of the potentially delinquent boy","author":"Raubenheimer A. S.","year":"1925","unstructured":"Raubenheimer A. S. (1925). An experimental study of some behavior traits of the potentially delinquent boy. Psychological Monographs, 34, Article 34.","journal-title":"Psychological Monographs, 34"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_41_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Raykov T. Marcoulides G. A. (2011). Classical item analysis using latent variable modeling: A note on a direct evaluation procedure. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 18(2) 315\u2013324. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/10705511.2011.557347","DOI":"10.1080\/10705511.2011.557347"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_42_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Rosseel Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software 48(2) 1\u201336. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.18637\/jss.v048.i02","DOI":"10.18637\/jss.v048.i02"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_43_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Schipolowski S. Wilhelm O. Schroeders U. (2014). On the nature of crystallized intelligence: The relationship between verbal ability and factual knowledge. Intelligence 46 156\u2013168. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.intell.2014.05.014","DOI":"10.1016\/j.intell.2014.05.014"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_44_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Stanovich K. E. Cunningham A. E. (1992). Studying the consequences of literacy within a literate society: The cognitive correlates of print exposure. Memory & Cognition 20(1) 51\u201368. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3758\/BF03208254","DOI":"10.3758\/BF03208254"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_45_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Steger D. Schroeders U. Wilhelm O. (2019). On the dimensionality of crystallized intelligence: A smartphone-based assessment. Intelligence 72 76\u201385. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.intell.2018.12.002","DOI":"10.1016\/j.intell.2018.12.002"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_46_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Steger D. Schroeders U. Wilhelm O. (2021). Caught in the act: Predicting cheating in unproctored knowledge assessment. Assessment 28(3) 1004\u20131017. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/1073191120914970","DOI":"10.1177\/1073191120914970"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_47_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Weng L.-J. (2004). Impact of the number of response categories and anchor labels on coefficient alpha and test-retest reliability. Educational and Psychological Measurement 64 956\u2013972. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/0013164404268674","DOI":"10.1177\/0013164404268674"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_48_1","unstructured":"Wilhelm O. (2009). Issues in computerized ability measurement: Getting out of the jingle and jangle jungle. In Scheuermann F. Pereira A. G. (Eds.) The transition to computer-based assessment (pp. 145\u2013150). Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. https:\/\/pure.au.dk\/ws\/files\/34330786\/reporttransition.pdf"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_49_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Wolf M. G. McNeish D. (2023). dynamic: An R package for deriving dynamic fit index cutoffs for factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research 58(1) 189\u2013194. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/00273171.2022.2163476","DOI":"10.1080\/00273171.2022.2163476"},{"key":"e_1_3_2_50_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ziegler M. Kemper C. Rammstedt B. (2013). The vocabulary and overclaiming test (VOC-T). Journal of Individual Differences 34(1) 32\u201340. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1027\/1614-0001\/a000093","DOI":"10.1027\/1614-0001\/a000093"}],"container-title":["Assessment"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/10731911261479975","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1177\/10731911261479975","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1177\/10731911261479975","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,1]],"date-time":"2026-09-01T17:54:26Z","timestamp":1788285266000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.1177\/10731911261479975"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,30]]},"references-count":49,"alternative-id":["10.1177\/10731911261479975"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/10731911261479975","relation":{},"ISSN":["1073-1911","1552-3489"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1073-1911","type":"print"},{"value":"1552-3489","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,30]]},"article-number":"10731911261479975"}}