Department of Psychology, California State University, Monterey Bay.
Department of Psychological Sciences, Kent State University.
Psychol Assess. 2019 Dec;31(12):1497-1511. doi: 10.1037/pas0000680.
In the near-100 years of their existence, response bias indicators have undergone significant advancements in design, as have efforts at examining their validity. However, opportunities remain for greater sophistication in the development and study of these indicators. We discuss important definitional issues pertaining to response bias before turning to a review of common methods used in this area of research followed by discussion of innovations that could further advance response bias investigation. Specifically, we focus on considerations for conducting research on the need for, evaluation, and design of response bias indicators. We review established and innovative research approaches and how they can be used to further this line of work. Throughout, we identify areas in need of additional study as we work to advance knowledge about the impact of invalid responding and the utility of the indicators available to detect it. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
在近 100 年的发展历程中，应答偏差指标在设计上取得了重大进展，同时也在努力检验其有效性。然而，在这些指标的开发和研究方面仍有更大的完善空间。我们在讨论应答偏差的重要定义问题之后，回顾了该研究领域中常用的方法，接着讨论了可以进一步推进应答偏差研究的创新方法。具体来说，我们关注的是在应答偏差指标的必要性、评估和设计方面开展研究的考虑因素。我们回顾了已建立的和创新的研究方法，以及如何使用这些方法来推进这一工作。在整个过程中，我们确定了需要进一步研究的领域，以便深入了解无效应答的影响以及现有检测指标的实用性。
