<sod>Critical reviews of the NEO-PI-R were published in the 12th edition of the [[Mental Measurements Yearbook]] (MMY), a source that includes critiques of a large number of psychological tests and scales. Widiger praised the NEO-PI-R for its development using a thorough factor analytic method but found issue with the lack of validity to control for social desirability.<ref>{{Cite book|title = Review of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory|last = Widiger|first = Thomas A.|publisher = Buros Institute of Mental Measurements|year = 1995|isbn = 0-910674-40-X|location = Lincoln, NE|pages = |editor-last = Conoley|editor-first = Jane Close|editor2-last = Impara|editor2-first = James C.|work = The Twelfth Mental Measurements Yearbook|edition = }} Retrieved from Mental Measurements Yearbook database.</ref> He argued that test developers cannot assume participants will be honest, especially in settings where it benefits people to present themselves in a better light (e.g., forensic or personnel settings). Ben-Porath and Waller agreed with this argument and pointed out that the NEO Inventories would be improved with the addition of a control for dishonesty or social desirability.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Ben-Porath Y. S., Waller N. G. | year = 1992 | title = Five big issues in clinical personality assessment: A rejoinder to Costa and McCrae | url = | journal = Psychological Assessment | volume = 4 | issue = 1| pages = 23–25 | doi = 10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.23 }}</ref><eod>
<sod>Critical reviews of the NEO-PI-R were published in the 12th edition of the [[Mental Measurements Yearbook]] (MMY), a source that includes critiques of a large number of psychological tests and scales. Widiger praised the NEO-PI-R for its having been developed with the help of factor analyses. He, however, criticized the NEO-PI-R for not controlling for social desirability bias.<ref>{{Cite book|title = Review of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory|last = Widiger|first = Thomas A.|publisher = Buros Institute of Mental Measurements|year = 1995|isbn = 0-910674-40-X|location = Lincoln, NE|pages = |editor-last = Conoley|editor-first = Jane Close|editor2-last = Impara|editor2-first = James C.|work = The Twelfth Mental Measurements Yearbook|edition = }} Retrieved from Mental Measurements Yearbook database.</ref> He argued that test developers cannot assume participants will be honest, especially in settings where it benefits people to present themselves in a better light (e.g., forensic or personnel settings). Ben-Porath and Waller agreed with this argument and pointed out that the NEO Inventories would be improved with the addition of a control for dishonesty or social desirability.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Ben-Porath Y. S., Waller N. G. | year = 1992 | title = Five big issues in clinical personality assessment: A rejoinder to Costa and McCrae | url = | journal = Psychological Assessment | volume = 4 | issue = 1| pages = 23–25 | doi = 10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.23 }}</ref><eod>