Survey Uses May Influence Survey Responses

Author:

Wolf Melissa G.1ORCID,Denison Alexander J.2

Affiliation:

1. University of California, Santa Barbara, USA

2. Clemson University, SC, USA

Abstract

Traditional validation processes for psychological surveys tend to focus on analyzing item responses instead of the cognitive processes that participants use to generate these responses. When screening for invalid responses, researchers typically focus on participants who manipulate their answers for personal gain or respond carelessly. In this paper, we introduce a new invalid response process, discordant responding, that arises when participants disagree with the use of the survey and discuss similarities and differences between this response style and protective responding. Results show that nearly all participants reflect on the intended uses of an assessment when responding to items and may decline to respond or modify their responses if they are not comfortable with the way the results will be used. Incidentally, we also find that participants may misread survey instructions if they are not interactive. We introduce a short screener to detect invalid responses, the discordant response identifiers (DRI), which provides researchers with a simple validity tool to use when validating surveys. Finally, we provide recommendations about how researchers may use these findings to design surveys that reduce this response manipulation in the first place.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Applied Psychology,Clinical Psychology

Reference61 articles.

1. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Validity. In Standards for educational and psychological testing (pp. 11–31). American Educational Research Association. https://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/standards

2. The Lazy or Dishonest Respondent: Detection and Prevention

3. Detection of Random Responding on the MMPI--A

4. The Validity and Clinical Utility of the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 Response Inconsistency Scale

5. Participant Attentiveness to Consent Forms

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3