Questions on honest responding

Abstract

This article presents a new method for reducing socially desirable responding in Internet self-reports of desirable and undesirable behavior. The method is based on moving the request for honest responding, often included in the introduction to surveys, to the questioning phase of the survey. Over a quarter of Internet survey participants do not read survey instructions, and therefore, instead of asking respondents to answer honestly, they were asked whether they responded honestly. Posing the honesty message in the form of questions on honest responding draws attention to the message, increases the processing of it, and puts subsequent questions in context with the questions on honest responding. In three studies (n Study I = 475, n Study II = 1,015, n Study III = 899), we tested whether presenting the questions on honest responding before questions on desirable and undesirable behavior could increase the honesty of responses, under the assumption that less attribution of desirable behavior and/or admitting to more undesirable behavior could be taken to indicate more honest responses. In all studies the participants who were presented with the questions on honest responding before questions on the target behavior produced, on average, significantly less socially desirable responses, though the effect sizes were small in all cases (Cohen's d ranging between 0.02 and 0.28 for single items, and from 0.17 to 0.34 for sum scores). The overall findings and the possible mechanisms behind the influence of the questions concerning honest responding on subsequent questions are discussed, and suggestions are made for future research.

COVID-19 Lockdown and Creativity: Exploring the Role of Emotions and Motivation on Creative Activities From the Chinese and German Perspectives

“…(1) As the pretests showed that at least 3 min were needed to complete the survey, participants who spent less than 200 s were excluded from analyses; (2) To avoid careless and untrustworthy responses, one attention check question was imbedded in the middle of the questionnaire ("If you see this question, please select "Extremely"). If a participant failed this check, his/her data were excluded from analyses; (3) To reduce social desirability, which is prone in self-report measures, we imbedded two honest response questions suggested by Vésteinsdóttir et al (2019). All cases that failed this check were excluded from analyses.…”

Creativity as a Means to Well-Being in Times of COVID-19 Pandemic: Results of a Cross-Cultural Study

“…Individualism puts individuals in the center of attention and emphasizes personal interests, individual values/goals, and independence of individuals. Collectivism, in contrast, prioritizes the group over the self and underlines collective interests, common values/goals, and interdependence of individuals (Hofstede, 1980;Triandis, 1995). Individualism and collectivism are among the most frequently studied cultural dimensions in psychological and social sciences (see a review, Oyserman et al, 2002;Taras et al, 2010) and have been often applied to explain the differences between the East and the West in creativity studies as well (e.g., Niu and Sternberg, 2001;Yi et al, 2013;Tang et al, 2018).…”

Disjunctive answer options complicate communication – a linguistic analysis of the danish EQ-5D (5 L) version

“…The cognitive interviews are considered the means to reveal these processes and, thus, contribute to the meaningfulness of a questionnaire as judged by the responders. There is, however, a risk that this process ignores the fact that responders (unconsciously) tend to answer in a socially desirable manner (fake good) (25,26), and sometimes seek to give answers conforming to what they think is expected from them (27).…”