I love those tests, especially the disclaimer they often have that says there "are no wrong answers". There might not be wrong answers, but there are certainly answers that will instantly disqualify you from having any chance of getting the job. I wrote a "personality assessment" for P&G recently that was one of the biggest farces I've ever seen. It had the "no wrong answers" disclaimer, but for every question it was obvious what the answer was that would give you the best chance of making it to the next stage.

They know your friend is lying.When they're asking you to tell the truth,they're actually testing whether you're gullible enough to tell the truth.So,you fail. But if you're interested I have some beachfront property in Idaho I'd like to sell you.

it's hard to be honest when trying out for a job these days. hence why I don't have a job. <3!

I've actually been in this situation myself. They didn't like my answers, and they basically told me "Sorry" and to leave.

There are a lot of different incarnations of those assessments, but I'm going to go against what pretty much everyone else has said and praise you for being honest. I'm amazed that no one has sued over some of those tests. The one for Best Buy, for instance, is strongly geared toward preventing them from hiring anyone with a mood or personality disorder. Generally, though... having some faults is okay. I just took one two Tuesdays ago in which I was honest that I had a history of being late for things and that I wouldn't feel like I was cheating the company if I took a fifteen minute break instead of a ten minute one, and I was still hired and started only a week after I took that test. I also think that I didn't get a job I applied for a couple of years ago because I (honestly) said that I had never shoplifted as a teenager, which there were six or seven questions about, and which caused them to assume I was a dirty rotten liar. Anyway, the bottom line is that the way the tests are graded will vary by company. If you value honesty, find a company that values honesty... and try to apply places where the psychological analysis is given at the same time as or after the first in-person review. The impression you make on the person doing the hiring will have more weight than a number spit out by a computer in response to a multiple-choice test.

you don't have to lie to get the job - you have to be responsible and fit for that position. Perhaps she lied, but just wait till they find it out if she isn't fit for the job. If she needed to lie a lot, she might as well leave herself when she finds she can't deal with the stress or rhythm or whatever.

I'm all about honesty. But those unicru tests and the similar think that because you know someone who at some point stole something (all of us do) that you are going to steal or invite all of your petty thug friends in to steal. They think that if you go to a party and hang out by the punch bowl instead of being the life of the party, it means you won't approach or be friendly with customers. If the tests were a fair evaluation, and the interviewers took the time to ask you about your answers, it would be different. But they are not a fair evaluation at all. The way they evaluate is antiquated and absurd. So lie through the test, and then be honest the rest of the way. If it helps, I know that for where I've worked, they don't know your actual answers or score. Just whether you passed or not. Most of the "little people" think these tests are crap, too. One of the ways I handled this was to transfer every question in to what they are really asking, in a retail context. Do I approach people at parties? Heck no. Do I approach customers? Of course. I also said, YDI, cause if you research those tests at all, you'd have found out how to handle it...

you're stupid

Okay, who DOESN'T know this? Obviously they're looking for someone that can act like they are the best employee, and understands what the job is expecting of them. You think they'll be interested in someone who can't even make themselves seem good on paper?

@ #23 (DarkJoy) That is called doublespeak which is language deliberately constructed to disguise or distort its actual meaning. Politicians use it all of the time to make things seem better than they really are. (i.e. downsizing = layoffs; air support = bombing; neutralize = kill; psychological deterrent = the largest non-nuclear bombs; protective custody = imprisonment without due process of law; doublespeak itself is a form of doublespeak; etc). It's not really lying, but it's not telling the truth either. I don't see how you could use doublespeak on an assessment that asks for yes or no answers, but during a face-to-face interview a person who is an excellent, smart, quick communicator can use doublespeak to his/her advantage.