2024
DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000731
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Impact of Different Methods to Correct for Response Styles on the External Validity of Self-Reports

Abstract: Abstract. Response styles (RSs) such as acquiescence represent systematic respondent behaviors in self-report questionnaires beyond the actual item content. They distort trait estimates and contribute to measurement bias in questionnaire-based research. Although various approaches were proposed to correct the influence of RSs, little is known about their relative performance. Because different correction methods formalize the latent traits differently, it is unclear how model choice affects the external validi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

2
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, in online research C/IER responses can bias assessments (Woods, 2006). Thus, empirical research is well-advised to adopt appropriate countermeasures, for example, by excluding conspicuous respondents (e.g., Arias et al, 2022; Schroeders et al, 2022) or explicitly modeling response styles (e.g., Aichholzer, 2014; Scharl & Gnambs, 2022). Finally, although the reported results do not exempt researchers from conducting systematic analyses of measurement invariance before addressing substantive research questions, our findings provide preliminary evidence of comparable measurement structures in English, German, and Spanish versions of the CSES.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, in online research C/IER responses can bias assessments (Woods, 2006). Thus, empirical research is well-advised to adopt appropriate countermeasures, for example, by excluding conspicuous respondents (e.g., Arias et al, 2022; Schroeders et al, 2022) or explicitly modeling response styles (e.g., Aichholzer, 2014; Scharl & Gnambs, 2022). Finally, although the reported results do not exempt researchers from conducting systematic analyses of measurement invariance before addressing substantive research questions, our findings provide preliminary evidence of comparable measurement structures in English, German, and Spanish versions of the CSES.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, an important extension of the present findings would be meta-analytic research on the criterion validity of the CSES. In this context, it might also be worthwhile to evaluate whether these validity correlations are susceptible to the choice of a specific psychometric model or how response styles are taken into account (see Scharl & Gnambs, 2022, for related findings).…”
Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, an important extension of the present findings would be metaanalytic research on the criterion validity of the CSES. In this context, it might also be worthwhile to evaluate whether these validity correlations are susceptible to the choice of a specific artifact model and how response styles are modeled (see Scharl & Gnambs, 2022, for related findings).…”
Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%