Why Would Someone Admit to Faking, Hostility, Drug Use, and Theft During an Integrity Test?

“My client wanted to know why someone taking our Integrity First assessment, which covers the topics of faking, hostility, drug use, and theft would admit to these activities.” This is a common and understandable question. After all, it seems counterintuitive that a job candidate would freely acknowledge behaviors that could disqualify them. 

The answer lies in a psychological concept known as cognitive dissonance, and understanding it can help you make more informed hiring decisions.

In this article, we’ll explore what cognitive dissonance is, why it leads some applicants to openly admit unethical actions, and how this insight can inform the use of pre-employment integrity assessments like IntegrityFirst. We’ll also cover the potential costs of a bad hire, pricing and cost structures of these tools, and provide reputable sources for further reading.

What Is Cognitive Dissonance?

Cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort experienced when a person holds two conflicting beliefs or attitudes, or when their behavior does not align with their values. Instead of changing their behavior, individuals often adjust their mindset to minimize discomfort. 

Over time, this rationalization process can normalize behaviors that might be clearly unethical to an external observer.

For example, a candidate who once felt guilty about taking small items from their workplace may, after repeated justifications (“Everyone does it” or “I deserve this”), stop feeling remorseful. Instead, they might come to view the behavior as normal, even trivial. This shift in perspective explains why some applicants are unusually honest on integrity tests: they’ve convinced themselves that these behaviors aren’t problematic in the first place.

Evidence-Based Insight:
Research in social psychology supports the power of cognitive dissonance in shaping attitudes and rationalizations. Individuals regularly alter their attitudes to align with their actions, even when those actions are unethical.

How Cognitive Dissonance Affects the Employment Process

1. Honesty About Unethical Behavior:
   Because some individuals genuinely believe their actions are acceptable, they may not feel a need to hide these behaviors. As a result, pre-employment assessments like IntegrityFirst—which screen for faking, hostility, drug use, and theft—can reveal important red flags before a costly hiring decision is made.
   
2. Impact on Organizational Culture:
   Hiring someone who rationalizes unethical behaviors can erode trust, increase turnover, and lead to higher workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation fraud is a $30 billion problem annually in the United States.
   
3. Reduced Accidents and Costs:
   Employees engaging in drug use or theft are more likely to cause accidents and financial losses. The employees who normalized deviant behaviors are more likely to engage in other forms of misconduct, ultimately harming productivity and safety.
   

Why Someone Would Admit to These Behaviors

1. Normalized Misconduct:
   Over time, repeated justifications reduce the mental tension. The individual might no longer see theft or hostility as “bad,” making them more candid.
   
2. External Blame and Justification:
   Some candidates feel their actions are a response to workplace injustices—such as feeling underpaid or undervalued—thus normalizing their behavior.
   
3. Underestimating Consequences:
   Individuals who have adjusted their worldview may not realize how harmful these admissions appear. They assume hiring managers will view things similarly.
   

The Costs of a Bad Hire

Hiring the wrong person is expensive—especially in today’s volatile economy. 41% of companies say a bad hire in the last year cost at least $25,000, and 25% say it cost at least $50,000. In a tougher market, these numbers can skyrocket due to factors like increased turnover, lower morale, and heightened workers’ compensation claims.

Supporting Evidence:
Poor hiring choices often lead to damaged team cohesion and lost productivity, compounding costs over time.

IntegrityFirst: How Does It Help?

IntegrityFirst is a pre-employment screening tool designed to detect overt integrity-related behaviors. Developed by industrial and organizational psychologists, it identifies high-risk behaviors—like theft, drug use, and hostility—before the candidate is hired. This proactive approach can:

• Reduce Workers’ Comp Costs: Lower claim frequency and total costs, improving overall profitability.
• Improve Employee Retention: By weeding out high-risk hires, the remaining team members feel safer and more aligned with company values.
• Boost Productivity and Morale: A workforce free of disruptive influences works more cohesively and efficiently.

Pricing and Costs:
IntegrityFirst is offered through The Hire Talent’s Discovered FACT-Driven Performance Hiring platform. Subscription fees are tiered based on your projected number of hires and applicant screenings each year. 

Smaller organizations might pay just a few hundred dollars per month for a limited number of assessments, while larger enterprises may opt for more robust packages with volume discounts. For the most accurate and up-to-date pricing, it’s best to contactThe Hire Talent directly.

Potential Drawbacks and Limitations:

• Additional Costs: While there’s a subscription fee for IntegrityFirst, the long-term ROI often justifies the expense.
• Candidate Experience: Some applicants may feel uneasy about integrity testing, though transparency about your reasons for testing can help ease concerns.
• Not a Standalone Solution: Integrity tests are a valuable tool, but they work best when combined with thorough interviews, reference checks, and other assessment methods.

Engaging and Educating Your Team

To ensure full transparency, consider sharing the rationale behind integrity testing with hiring managers and team leads. Show them how cognitive dissonance may cause candidates to admit to behaviors that are not aligned with your company’s values. Educate your team on how these admissions actually make the hiring process more accurate and efficient, helping you avoid bad hires and fostering a more ethical workplace.

Welcome to Further Discussion

We understand that making informed hiring decisions is complex. Cognitive dissonance is just one piece of the puzzle. If you have more questions or want to share your thoughts, please leave a comment below. We’re here to help guide you through the hiring process and provide additional resources or support as needed.

For more personalized assistance or to learn more about IntegrityFirst’s offerings, feel free to book a demo with our experts.