Careless responding detection revisited: Accuracy of direct and indirect measures
OPEN ACCESS
Loading...
Author / Producer
Date
2024-12
Publication Type
Journal Article
ETH Bibliography
yes
Citations
Altmetric
OPEN ACCESS
Data
Rights / License
Abstract
To screen for careless responding, researchers have a choice between several direct measures (i.e., bogus items, requiring the respondent to choose a specific answer) and indirect measures (i.e., unobtrusive post hoc indices). Given the dearth of research in the area, we examined how well direct and indirect indices perform relative to each other. In five experimental studies, we investigated whether the detection rates of the measures are affected by contextual factors: severity of the careless response pattern, type of item keying, and type of item presentation. We fully controlled the information environment by experimentally inducing careless response sets under a variety of contextual conditions. In Studies 1 and 2, participants rated the personality of an actor that presented himself in a 5-min-long videotaped speech. In Studies 3, 4, and 5, participants had to rate their own personality across two measurements. With the exception of maximum longstring, intra-individual response variability, and individual contribution to model misfit, all examined indirect indices performed better than chance in most of the examined conditions. Moreover, indirect indices had detection rates as good as and, in many cases, better than the detection rates of direct measures. We therefore encourage researchers to use indirect indices, especially within-person consistency indices, instead of direct measures.
Permanent link
Publication status
published
External links
Editor
Book title
Journal / series
Volume
56 (8)
Pages / Article No.
8422 - 8449
Publisher
Springer
Event
Edition / version
Methods
Software
Geographic location
Date collected
Date created
Subject
Careless responding; Careless responding detection; Infrequency items; Bogus items; Indirect methods