Röhner, JessicaJessicaRöhner0000-0003-0633-3386Holden, Ronald R.Ronald R.HoldenSchütz, AstridAstridSchütz0000-0002-6358-167X2023-01-102023-01-102022https://fis.uni-bamberg.de/handle/uniba/56855Als Zeitschriftenartikel erschienen in: Behavior research methods : BRM. (2022), Online First. - DOI: 10.3758/s13428-022-01845-0. Siehe auch FIS-Eintrag: https://fis.uni-bamberg.de/handle/uniba/54527Indices [slowing, speeding, increasing or reducing errors in congruent or incongruent blocks; Combined Task Slowing (CTS); Ratio 150-10000] allegedly detect faking in IATs, however, studies on these are inconclusive and statistically underpowered. Also, results’ stability, indices’ unique predictivity, combining indices, and variations in computing faking success remain unexplored. We reanalyzed a large sample (N = 750) completing an extraversion IAT, finding that faking strategies depend on the direction of faking. Successful faking of low scores was detected from slowing down on the congruent block, and less with CTS. Successful faking of high scores was detected from slowing down and increasing errors on the incongruent block, and with CTS. Results demonstrated stability across subsamples and different computations of faking success. Increasing errors had the strongest impact on the classification. Apparently, fakers use goal-dependent strategies which are not all successful. To detect faking, we recommend combining indices and considering the context.engfakingfaking detectionImplicit Association Test (IAT)Replication150conferenceobjecturn:nbn:de:bvb:473-irb-568552