The Conscientious Responders Scale

Marjanovic, Zdravko; Struthers, C. Ward; Cribbie, Robert A.; Greenglass, Esther R.

doi:10.1177/2158244014545964

Cited by 100 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An additional nine were eliminated due to their low CRS scores, which identified them as random responders (i.e., cases with CRS sum score ≤ 3). This constitutes a random responding rate of 7.69% and is consistent with random responding rates found in other undergraduate samples surveyed with the CRS (e.g., Marjanovic, Holden, Struthers, Cribbie, & Greenglass, 2015; Marjanovic et al, 2014) and similar validity measures (see Meade & Craig, 2012). (Note that all statistics and indices were strengthened and improved after the deletion of the nine identified random responders).…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 86%

“…The CRS (Marjanovic et al, 2014) consists of five items that are embedded amongst other items in a questionnaire to identify non-conscientious responders. The items are instructional (e.g., “To respond to this question, please choose option number five, ‘slightly agree’”) and scored as correct (1) or incorrect (0).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The items are instructional (e.g., “To respond to this question, please choose option number five, ‘slightly agree’”) and scored as correct (1) or incorrect (0). Following guidelines from Marjanovic et al (2014), participants scoring a total of 0, 1, or 2, out of a possible 5, were considered random responders and were omitted from the analyses.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Believing is doing: Emotion regulation beliefs are associated with emotion regulation behavioral choices and subjective well-being

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research in emotion regulation has begun to examine various predictors of emotion regulation choices, including individual differences and contextual variables. However, scant attention has been paid to the extent to which people’s beliefs about the specific consequences of emotion regulation strategies for the components of an emotional response and long-term well-being predict their behavioral regulatory choices and, in turn, their subjective well-being. Participants completed measures to assess their beliefs about the consequences of functional and dysfunctional strategies, behavioral choices of emotion regulation strategies in negative scenarios, and subjective well-being. The model that fit the data indicated partial mediation whereby beliefs were associated with approximately 9% of the variance in choices. Emotion regulation choices were related to subjective well-being, with an additional direct effect between beliefs and well-being. This suggests beliefs play a role in people’s regulatory choices. Future research should explore how beliefs interact with individual differences and contextual variables to better understand why people regulate their emotions in different ways and, ultimately, to help individuals make healthy emotion regulation choices.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Believing is doing: Emotion regulation beliefs are associated with emotion regulation behavioral choices and subjective well-being

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of these individuals, 6.3% (n = 26) were excluded from the final sample because they did not correctly answer two validity check questions derived from the Conscientious Responders Scale (CRS; e.g., "Choose the first option-"strongly disagree"-in answering this question. "; Marjanovic, Struthers, Cribbie, & Greenglass, 2014). There were no statistically significant differences in age, gender, race, ethnicity, educational attainment, or marital status between those who passed and failed the CRS validity check questions (ps > .05); however, individuals identifying as heterosexual/straight were less likely than those identifying as other sexual orientations to provide valid responses to the CRS questions (χ 2 [5] = 12.075, p = .034).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 90%

PTSD from a suicide attempt: An empirical investigation among suicide attempt survivors

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Suicide attempts (SAs), by definition, represent a risk for serious injury or death; thus, one's SA may contribute to the development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Yet, empirical data on this topic are lacking. This study aimed to characterize the phenomenology, rate, and associated features of PTSD following one's SA. Method A total of 386 adult SA survivors recruited from web‐based sources participated. Results Overall, 27.5% (95% confidence interval = 23.1–31.9%) of SA survivors screened positive for a probable SA‐related PTSD diagnosis. Individuals with a probable SA‐related PTSD diagnosis reported greater current suicidal intent than those without this probable diagnosis; this association was significant at low, but not high, levels of depression symptoms. Conclusions A substantial proportion of SA survivors may experience SA‐related PTSD. SA‐related PTSD may be a viable assessment and intervention target to improve the quality of life and to reduce future suicide risk among SA survivors.

show abstract

“…Heretofore, it has been simpler to just accept the variance-killing effect of random responding than to try to do anything about it. Marjanovic, Struthers, Cribbie, and Greenglass (2014) attempted to remedy the situation by introducing a novel tool for identifying conscientious responders in inventory data: the five-item Conscientious Responders Scale (CRS). Its advantages over traditional random responding scales stem from its use of instructional item content.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The inter-item standard deviation (ISD): An index that discriminates between conscientious and random responders

Marjanovic

Holden

Struthers

et al. 2015

Personality and Individual Differences

Self Cite

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although random responding is prevalent and increases Type II errors, most psychologists avoid trying to identify it because the means to do so are extremely limited. We propose the inter-item standard deviation (ISD), a statistical index of response variance, is suited for this task. We hypothesized that random responders produce large ISDs because they respond to items all over a measure's response range, whereas conscientious responders produce small ISDs because they respond to items more consistently. We administered a questionnaire containing the NEO-FFI-3 and an embedded validity scale to 134 university students. Another 134 responders were created using a random number generator. For all 268 responders, the ISD was calculated for each of the NEO-FFI-3 0 s five subscales and an aggregated ISD was calculated by averaging the five ISD indexes. Results showed that (1) random responders produce significantly larger ISDs than conscientious responders, (2) the ISDs were strongly correlated with the embedded validity scale and with one another, and (3) the ISDs correctly identified responders with greater than 80% classification accuracy. The mean ISD yielded greater than 95% classification accuracy. This study shows that responders can be identified by quantifying inter-item response variance.

show abstract

The Conscientious Responders Scale

Cited by 100 publications

References 26 publications

Believing is doing: Emotion regulation beliefs are associated with emotion regulation behavioral choices and subjective well-being

Believing is doing: Emotion regulation beliefs are associated with emotion regulation behavioral choices and subjective well-being

PTSD from a suicide attempt: An empirical investigation among suicide attempt survivors

The inter-item standard deviation (ISD): An index that discriminates between conscientious and random responders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About