Introduction: Deceptive self-presentation in hiring undermines decision quality, yet its deeper psychological roots remain unclear. We theorize that overconfidence—unrealistically high self-views of competence—motivates applicants to seek self-verifying social feedback and, when evidence is lacking, to misrepresent qualifications. A dual-process account reconciles sincere overconfidence with deliberate deception.


Purpose: We test whether confidence-competence misalignment (overconfidence) predicts greater deceptive impression management (DIM) and whether self-verification motives amplify this effect.


Method: Four studies (total N = 876) across real and simulated selection contexts used second-order polynomial regression with response-surface analysis. Study 1 surveyed recent interviewees (N = 125). Study 2 replicated in an online worker sample (N = 257) and measured individual differences in self-verification motives. Study 3 implemented a two-wave design with feedback-verified ability tests and an objective behavioral DIM score (N = 114). Study 4 experimentally manipulated overconfidence via fuzzy performance feedback before a financially incentivized application task and captured behavioral DIM (N = 380).


Results: Across studies, competence negatively predicted DIM, confidence showed positive linear and curvilinear effects, and, crucially, misalignment along the line of incongruence increased DIM, particularly when confidence exceeded competence. In Study 2, self-verification motives strengthened the effects of confidence and low competence and moderated the confidence×competence pattern; heatmaps showed a larger overconfidence zone among high-verification participants. In Study 3, misalignment predicted objective DIM despite true feedback. In Study 4, the manipulation shifted confidence (not competence), producing stronger misalignment effects and a condition-moderated surface.


Conclusions: Overconfidence promotes deceptive self-presentation as a validation-seeking route to self-verification. Findings lay preliminary evidence for an extension self-verification theory by identifying deception as a fourth verification tactic and illuminate why overconfident candidates are mistaken for highly competent. Practically, results support screening for overconfidence, structuring interviews to raise verification costs, and emphasizing evidence-based claims in applicant communications.