doi:

DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2017.01664

Advances in Psychological Science (心理科学进展) 2017/25:10 PP.1664-1674

Measurement and control of Socially Desirable Responding


Abstract:
Socially Desirable Responding (SDR) is one of the most common sources of bias that affect the validity of personality tests. Considerable attempts have been made to investigate the concept and explore its underlying structure, resulting in a number of SDR measurement scales. The aim of the article is to review the literature on the development of SDR measures and identify unsolved issues. From both preventive and retrospective perspectives, the authors compared current approaches to coping with SDR and revealed the influence of retrospective control on the validity of SDR scales. Lastly, additional guidance is provided on potential methods of SDR reduction.

Key words:Socially Desirable Responding (SDR),self-deception,impression management

ReleaseDate:2017-11-17 09:48:02



刘萃侠. (2001). 马洛-克罗恩社会赞许性量表对中国被试适用性之初步验证. 社会学研究, (2), 49-57.

王珊, 骆方, 刘红云. (2014). 迫选式人格测验的传统计分与IRT计分模型. 心理科学进展, 22, 549-557.

杨中芳. (1996). 如何研究中国人:心理学本土化论文集. 台北:桂冠图书公司.

Aldridge, T. R., & Gore, J. S. (2016). Linking personality traits with well-being:The influence of primary social roles. Psychological Studies, 61, 233-244.

Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1996). Effects of impression management and self-deception on the predictive validity of personality constructs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 261-272.

Block, J. (1965). The challenge of response sets:Unconfounding meaning, acquiescence, and social desirability in the MMPI. New York:Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Brown, A. (2016). Item response models for forced-choice questionnaires:A common framework. Psychometrika, 81, 135-160.

Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2011). Item response modeling of forced-choice questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 460-502.

Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2013). How IRT can solve problems of ipsative data in forced-choice questionnaires. Psychological Methods, 18, 36-52.

Claes, L., Tavernier, G., Roose, A., Bijttebier, P., Smith, S. F., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2014). Identifying personality subtypes based on the five-factor model dimensions in male prisoners:Implications for psychopathy and criminal offending. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 58, 41-58.

Cvencek, D., Greenwald, A. G., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2016). Implicit measures for preschool children confirm self-esteem's role in maintaining a balanced identity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 50-57.

Edwards, A. L., & Walker, J. N. (1961). A short form of the MMPI:The SD scale. Psychological Reports, 8, 485-486.

Ellingson, J. E., Sackett, P. R., & Hough, L. M. (1999). Social desirability corrections in personality measurement:Issues of applicant comparison and construct validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 155-166.

Elliot, A. J., Aldhobaiban, N., Murayama, K., Kobeisy, A., Gocłowska, M. A., & Khyat, A. (2016). Impression management and achievement motivation:Investigating substantive links. International Journal of Psychology, doi:10.1002/ijop.12252. (in Press)

Furnham, A., Petrides, K. V., & Spencer-Bowdage, S. (2002). The effects of different types of social desirability on the identification of repressors. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 119-130.

Gómez, F. J., Crespo, G. S., & Tobón, C. (2009). A social desirability scale for the MMPI-2:Which of the two:Wiggins (WSD) or Edwards (ESD)? The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 1, 147-163.

Graham, J. R. (2000). Use with special groups. In J. R. Graham (Ed.), MMPI-2:Assessing Personality and Psychopathology (pp. 215-244). New York:Oxford University Press.

Greenberg, B., & Weiss, P. (2012). Validation of a short form of the Marlowe-Crowne for use with law enforcement personnel. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 27, 123-128.

Guenole, N., Brown, A. A., & Cooper, A. J. (2016). Forced-choice assessment of work-related maladaptive personality traits:Preliminary evidence from an application of thurstonian item response modeling. Assessment, doi:10.1177/1073191116641181. (in Press)

Holden, R. R., Book, A. S., Edwards, M. J., Wasylkiw, L., & Starzyk, K. B. (2003). Experimental faking in self-reported psychopathology:Unidimensional or multidimensional? Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1107-1117.

Hontangas, P. M., de la Torre, J., Ponsoda, V., Leenen, I., Morillo, D., & Abad, F. J. (2015). Comparing traditional and IRT scoring of forced-choice tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 39, 598-612.

Jiménez-Gómez, F., Sánchez-Crespo, G., & Ampudia-Rueda, A. (2013). Is there a social desirability scale in the MMPI-2-RF? Clínica y Salud, 24, 161-168.

Kam, C. (2013). Probing item social desirability by correlating personality items with Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR):A validity examination. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 513-518.

Kelly, E. L., Miles, C. C., & Terman, L. M. (1936). Ability to influence one's score on a typical pencil-and-paper test of personality. Journal of Personality, 4, 206-215.

Krumpal, I. (2013). Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys:A literature review. Quality & Quantity, 47, 2025-2047.

Kurz, A. S., Drescher, C. F., Chin, E. G., & Johnson, L. R. (2016). Measuring social desirability across language and sex:A comparison of Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale factor structures in English and Mandarin Chinese in Malaysia. PsyCh Journal, 5, 92-100.

Lambert, C. E., Arbuckle, S. A., & Holden, R. R. (2016). The Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale outperforms the BIDR impression management scale for identifying fakers. Journal of Research in Personality, 61, 80-86.

Lanyon, R. I., & Carle, A. C. (2007). Internal and external validity of scores on the balanced inventory of desirable responding and the Paulhus deception scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 859-876.

Leite, W. L., & Beretvas, S. N. (2005). Validation of scores on the Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale and the balanced inventory of desirable responding. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65, 140-154.

Leite, W. L., & Cooper, L. A. (2010). Detecting social desirability bias using factor mixture models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 271-293.

Li, A., & Bagger, J. (2007). The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR):A reliability generalization study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 525-544.

Li, F., & Li, Y. J. (2008). The balanced inventory of desirable responding (BIDR):A factor analysis. Psychological Reports, 103, 727-731.

Li, A., & Reb, J. (2008). A cross-nations, cross-cultures, and cross-conditions analysis on the equivalence of the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 2, 214-233.

Lönnqvist, J. E., Verkasalo, M., & Bezmenova, I. (2007). Agentic and communal bias in socially desirable responding. European Journal of Personality, 21, 853-868.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1983). Social desirability scales:More substance than style. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 882-888.

Miller, B. K., & Gallagher, D. G. (2016). Examining trait entitlement using the self-other knowledge asymmetry model. Personality and Individual Differences, 92, 113-117.

Nederhof, A. J. (1985). Methods of coping with social desirability bias:A review. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 263-280.

Parmač Kovačić, M., Galić, Z., & Jerneić, Ž. (2014). Social desirability scales as indicators of self-enhancement and impression management. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96, 532-543.

Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598-609.

Paulhus, D. L. (1986). Self-deception and impression management in test responses. In A. Angleitner & J. S. Wiggins (Eds.), Personality assessment via questionnaires (pp. 143-165). Berlin Heidelberg, Germany:Springer.

Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes (pp. 17-59). New York:Academic Press.

Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait self-enhancement:A mixed blessing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1197-1208.

Paulhus, D. L. (2002). Socially desirable responding:The evolution of a construct. In H. Braun, D. N. Jackson, & D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement (pp. 67-88). Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.

Pauls, C. A., & Crost, N. W. (2004). Effects of faking on self-deception and impression management scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1137-1151.

Perinelli, E., & Gremigni, P. (2016). Use of social desirability scales in clinical psychology:A systematic review. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 72, 534-551.

Rosse, J. G., Stecher, M. D., Miller, J. L., & Levin, R. A. (1998). The impact of response distortion on preemployment personality testing and hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 634-644.

Sackeim, H. A., & Gur, R. C. (1978). Self-deception, self-confrontation, and consciousness. In G. E. Schwartz & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation (pp. 139-197). New York:Springer.

Sârbescu, P., Costea, I., & Rusu, S. (2012). Psychometric properties of the Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale in a Romanian sample. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 33, 707-711.

Schinka, J. A., Kinder, B. N., & Kremer, T. (1997). Research validity scales for the NEO——PI——R:Development and initial validation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 127-138.

Sjöberg, L. (2015). Correction for faking in self-report personality tests. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 56, 582-591.

Vésteinsdóttir, V., Reips, U. D., Joinson, A., & Thorsdottir, F. (2015). Psychometric properties of measurements obtained with the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale in an Icelandic probability based Internet sample. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 608-614.

Vésteinsdóttir, V., Reips, U. D., Joinson, A., & Thorsdottir, F. (2017). An item level evaluation of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale using item response theory on Icelandic Internet panel data and cognitive interviews. Personality and Individual Differences, 107, 164-173.

Vispoel, W. P., & Kim, H. Y. (2014). Psychometric properties for the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding:Dichotomous versus polytomous conventional and IRT scoring. Psychological Assessment, 26, 878-891.

Vu, A., Tran, N., Pham, K., & Ahmed, S. (2011). Reliability of the Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale in Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique, and Uganda. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11, 162.

Wang, W. C. (2015, October). New item response theory models for ipsative data. Paper presented at the 2015 Taiwanese Psychological Association Annual Convention and The International Convention of Learning, Teaching, and Assessment, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.

Wiggins, J. S. (1964). Convergences among stylistic response measures from objective personality tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24, 551-562.

Whitaker, L., Long, J., Petróczi, A., & Backhouse, S. H. (2014). Using the prototype willingness model to predict doping in sport. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 24, e398-e405.

Ziegler, M., & Buehner, M. (2009). Modeling socially desirable responding and its effects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 548-565.

Ziegler, M., & Kemper, C. (2013). Extreme response style and faking:Two sides of the same coin. In P. Winker, N. Menold, & R. Porst. Interviewers deviations in surveys-impact, reasons, detection and prevention (pp. 217-233). Frankfurt, Germany:Peter Lang.

Ziegler, M., MacCann, C., & Roberts, R. D. (Eds.). (2012). New perspectives on faking in personality assessment. Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.