Social desirability, anonymity, and internet-based questionnaires

Joinson, Adam

doi:10.3758/bf03200723

Cited by 618 publications

(377 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

339

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, recent research has shown that it is both reliable and valid method and certainly as reliable and as valid as more conventional methods of sampling undergraduate students (Behrend, Sharek, Meade, & Wiebe, 2011;Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011;Summerville & Chartier, 2012). Furthermore, anonymity may be more of a benefit than a detriment (Joinson, 1999;Joinson, Woodley, & Reips, 2007). Another explanation for the difference in findings between the two studies is that the age difference between the two samples.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 48%

Gender differences in response to Facebook status updates from same and opposite gender friends

Joiner

Cuprinskaite

Dapkeviciute

et al. 2016

Computers in Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conducted two studies to examine gender differences in response to Facebook status updates from same and opposite gender friends. Study 1 surveyed 522 undergraduate students (216 females and 306 males), and compared males' and females' responses to two Facebook status updates: one from a same gender friend and one from an opposite gender friend. Females' public replies and private messages to a female friend showed higher levels of emotional support than males' public replies and private messages to a male friend. In contrast, there were no significant gender differences in response to an opposite gender friend. Furthermore, males showed higher levels of emotional support in private messages than in public replies to male friends. Study 2 recruited 484 participants (295 females and 189 males) using CrowdFlower. Approximately half received a Facebook status update from a same gender friend and the other half received it from an opposite gender friend. Females' public replies to a female friend showed significantly high levels of emotional support than males' public replies to a male friend and there was a similar but marginally significant gender difference for private replies to same gender friends. There was no gender difference in response to opposite gender friends. The practical and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 48%

Gender differences in response to Facebook status updates from same and opposite gender friends

Joiner

Cuprinskaite

Dapkeviciute

et al. 2016

Computers in Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, Pursey et al (2014) reported that the prevalence of overweight was 2.6 % lower when using SR compared with measured values, but there was no difference for obesity prevalence. Although social desirability may drive differences between SR and measured values (Joinson 1999), we found very good agreement between the internet-based SR and validation measures for the key anthropometric variables height and weight, suggesting that, in an internet-based setting, participants may be less prone to social desirability bias. This apparently enhanced truthfulness may result from the greater feeling of anonymity when using the web rather than other media such as the telephone (Joinson 1999).…”

Section: Concordance Of Bmi Classificationmentioning

confidence: 63%

“…Although social desirability may drive differences between SR and measured values (Joinson 1999), we found very good agreement between the internet-based SR and validation measures for the key anthropometric variables height and weight, suggesting that, in an internet-based setting, participants may be less prone to social desirability bias. This apparently enhanced truthfulness may result from the greater feeling of anonymity when using the web rather than other media such as the telephone (Joinson 1999). However, the reliability of more difficult self-measurements such as waist and hip circumferences need to be explored in future studies.…”

Section: Concordance Of Bmi Classificationmentioning

confidence: 63%

How reliable is internet-based self-reported identity, socio-demographic and obesity measures in European adults?

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In e-health intervention studies, there are concerns about the reliability of internet-based, self-reported (SR) data and about the potential for identity fraud. This study introduced and tested a novel procedure for assessing the validity of internet-based, SR identity and validated anthropometric and demographic data via measurements performed face-to-face in a validation study (VS). Participants (n = 140) from seven European countries, participating in the Food4Me intervention study which aimed to test the efficacy of personalised nutrition approaches delivered via the internet, were invited to take part in the VS. Participants visited a research centre in each country within 2 weeks of providing SR data via the internet. Participants received detailed instructions on how to perform each measurement. Individual's identity was checked visually and by repeated collection and analysis of buccal cell DNA for 33 genetic variants. Validation of identity using genomic information showed perfect concordance between SR and VS. Similar results were found for demographic data (age and sex verification). We observed strong intra-class correlation coefficients between SR and VS for anthropometric data (height 0.990, weight 0.994 and BMI 0.983). However, internet-based SR weight was under-reported (D -0.70 kg [-3.6 to 2.1], p \ 0.0001) and, therefore, BMI was lower for SR data (D -0.29 kg m -2 [-1.5 to 1.0], p \ 0.0001). BMI classification was correct in 93 % of cases. We demonstrate the utility of genotype information for detection of possible identity fraud in e-health studies and confirm the reliability Carlos Celis-Morales and Katherine M. Livingstone have contributed equally to this work.On behalf of the Food4Me Study.Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Electronic supplementary material 123Genes Nutr (2015) 10:28 DOI 10.1007/s12263-015-0476-0 of internet-based, SR anthropometric and demographic data collected in the Food4Me study.Trial registration: NCT01530139 (http://clinicaltrials.gov/ show/NCT01530139).

show abstract

“…Using an Internet-based sample allowed for access to a comparatively large number of homosexual individuals and provided some degree of control over social desirability effects in responses (Joinson, 1999). However it is possible that both the samples of heterosexual and homosexual males are dissimilar to offline samples, since they were self-selected participants.…”

Section: Methodological Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on the methods of Hewson, Yule, Laurent and Vogel (2003), scores from this research will therefore be compared to existing data collected from traditional (non-internet) samples to assess generality. One criticism of studies using self-report measures of indirect aggression (Österman, Björkqvist, Lagerspetz, Kauiainen, Huesman, & Fraczek, 1994) and empathy (Kaukiainen et al, 1998) is the influence of social desirability; the privacy offered through online sampling represents an efficient way to alleviate this problem and has been shown to significantly reduce social desirability effects (Joinson, 1999).…”

Section: P<001)mentioning

confidence: 99%