Social desirability is the same in offline, online, and paper surveys: A meta-analysis

Abstract

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare social desirability scores between paper and computer surveys. Subgroup analyses were conducted with Internet connectivity, level of anonymity, individual or group test setting, possibility of skipping items, possibility of backtracking previous items, inclusion of questions of sensitive nature, and social desirability scale type as moderators. Subgroup analyses were also conducted for study characteristics, namely the randomisation of participants, sample type (students vs. other), and study design (between-vs. within-subjects). Social desirability scores between the two administration modes were compared for 51 studies that included 62 independent samples and 16,700 unique participants. The overall effect of administration mode was close to zero (Cohen's d = 0.00 for fixed-effect and d = À0.01 for random-effects meta-analysis). The majority of the effect sizes in the subgroup analyses were not significantly different from zero either. The effect sizes were close to zero for both Internet and offline surveys. In conclusion, the totality of evidence indicates that there is no difference in social desirability between paper-and-pencil surveys and computer surveys. Publication year and sample size were positively correlated (q = .64), which suggests that certain of the large effects that have been found in the past may have been due to sampling error.

Measurement invariance of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire across samples of young drivers from Finland and Ireland

“…In the field of epidemiology, it has been shown that respondents taking an online questionnaire do not systematically differ from those surveyed by more traditional means in terms of age, gender, income, education or health status (van Gelder, Bretveld, & Roeleveld, 2010). The issue of differences in social desirability was addressed in a recent meta-analysis encompassing 16,700 participants (Dodou & de Winter, 2014). That study found no differences in social desirability scores in paper and computer surveys.…”

Pleasure in using adaptive cruise control: A questionnaire study in The Netherlands

“…Social desirability may especially be at play when it comes to disclosing illegal activities such as using a mobile phone while driving or when indicating one's risk awareness (e.g., Q18). However, anonymity, as was adopted in the present survey, may resolve some of these concerns (Dodou and de Winter 2014). For example, Lajunen and Summala (2003) found that in a public setting (i.e., when applying for a driving instructor training course as part of the entrance examination), not one of about 50 respondents admitted having been driving when over the legal blood alcohol limit, whereas 23% confessed this illegal behavior in a private setting in which confidentiality was stressed.…”

Differences in Adolescent Effective Contraception Use between Population Densities

“…Additionally, given the study's strategy of obtaining information via self-report as opposed to objective measures, it has the potential of leading to ascertainment bias, specifically responder reporting bias. Where this was avoided to the best extent possible by ensuring confidentiality and providing both in-person and lap-top interviewing methods, subjects have a natural tendency to answer questions in a way that allows them to align with cultural beliefs [21]. This likely lead to a decrease in the overall reported number of undesired pregnancies and in increase in the overall reported contraception use, and therefore our results likely underestimate the true unintended pregnancy rate.…”