Acquiescence as differential person functioning

Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 535-548

  Johanson, George A ^a   Osborn, Cynthia J ^b  

^a OHIO UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b KENT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449576867     PISSN: 02602938     EISSN: 1469297X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02602930410001689126     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. Allalouf, A., Hambleton, R. K. & Sireci, S. G. (1999) Identifying the causes of DIF in translated verbal items, Journal of Measurement Educational, 36(3), 185-198.
2. Barnette, J. J. (1999) Nonattending respondent effects on internal consistency of self-administered surveys: a Monte Carlo simulation study, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59(1), 38-46.
3. Benson, J. & Hocevar, D. (1985) The impact of item phrasing on the validity of attitude scales for elementary school children, Journal of Educational Measurement, 22(3), 231-240.
4. Best, J. W. & Kahn, J. V. (1998) Research in education (8th edn) (Needham Heights, MA, Allyn & Bacon).
5. Camilli, G. & Shepard, L. A. (1994) Methods for identifying biased test items (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage).
6. Clauser, B., Mazor, K. M. & Hambleton, R. K. (1994) The effects of score group width on the Mantel-Haenszel procedure, Journal of Educational Measurement, 31(1), 67-78.
7. Couch, A. & Keniston, K. (1960) Yeasayers and naysayers: agreeing response set as a personality variable, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60, 151-174.
8. Cronbach, L. J. (1942) Studies of acquiescence as a factor in the true-false test, The Journal of Educational Psychology, 33, 401-415.
9. Crowl, T. K. (1996) Fundamentals of educational research (2nd edn) (Madison, WI, Brown & Benchmark).
10. Davison, M. L. & Srichantra, N. (1988) Acquiescence in components analysis and multidimensional scaling of self-rating items, Applied Psychological Measurement, 12(4), 339-351.
11. Dodeen, H. & Johanson, G. A. (2003) An analysis of sex-related differential item functioning in attitude assessment, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(2), 129-134.
12. Donoghue, J. R. & Allen, N. L. (1993) Thin versus thick matching in the Mantel-Haenszel procedure for detecting DIF, Journal of Educational Statistics, 18(2), 131-154.
13. Dorans, N. J. (1989) Two new approaches to assessing differential item functioning: standardization and the Mantel-Haenszel method, Applied Measurement in Education, 2(3), 217-233.
14. Dorans, N. J. & Holland, P. W. (1993) DIF detection and description: Mantel-Haenszel and standardization, in P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds) Differential item functioning (Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 35-66.
15. Helmes, E. & Holden, R. R. (2003) The construct of social desirability: one or two dimensions?, Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 1015-1023.
16. Holden, R. R., Fekken, G. C. & Jackson, D. N. (1985) Structured personality test item characteristics and validity, Journal of Research in Personality, 19(4), 386-394.
17. Holland, P. W. & Thayer, D. T. (1988) Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure, in: H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds) Test validity (Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 129-145.
18. Jackson, D. N. (1967) Acquiescence response styles: problems of identification and control, in: I. A. Berg (Ed.) Response set in personality assessment (Chicago, IL, Aldine), 71-114.
19. Johanson, G. A. (1997) Differential item functioning in attitude assessment, Evaluation Practice, 18(2), 127-135.
20. Johanson, G. A. & Alsmadi, A. (2002) Differential person functioning, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62(3), 435-443.
21. Knowles, E. S. & Nathan, K. T. (1997) Acquiescent responding in self-reports: cognitive style or social concern?, Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 293-301.
22. Krathwohl, D. R. (1993) Methods of educational and social science research: an integrated approach (New York, Longman).
23. Krosnick, J. A. (1991) Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measurement in surveys, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 213-236.
24. Krosnick, J. A. (1999a) Maximizing questionnaire quality, in: J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds) Measures of political attitudes (San Diego, CA, Academic Press), 37-57.
25. Krosnick, J. A. (1999b) Survey research, Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 537-567.
26. Lentz, T. F. (1938) Acquiescence as a factor in the measurement of personality [abstract], Psychological Bulletin, 35, 659.
27. Mantel, N. & Haenszel, W. (1959) Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22, 719-748.
28. Marsh, H. W. (1986) Negative item bias in rating scales for preadolescent children: a cognitivedevelopmental phenomenon, Developmental Psychology, 22(1), 37-49.
29. McGee, R. K. (1962) Response style as a personality variable: by what criterion? Psychological Bulletin, 59(4), 284-295.
30. McSteen, P. E. (1997) An investigation of the relationship between dispositional optimism and family environment, psychological hardiness, and locus of control, Dissertation Abstracts International, AAT9732649.
31. Miklich, D. R. (1966) Social desirability and 'acquiescent response set', Psychological Reports, 19, 887-890.
32. Moos, R. H. & Moos, B. S. (1994) Family Environment Scale manual: development, applications, research (3rd edn) (Palo Alto, CA, Consulting Psychologists Press).
33. Mueller, D. J. (1986) Measuring social attitudes: a handbook for researchers and practitioners (New York, Teachers College Press).
34. Narayan, S. & Krosnick, J. A. (1996) Education moderates some response effects in attitude measurement, Public Opinion Quarterly, 60, 58-88.
35. Osborn, C. J. & Johanson, G. A. (2001) Development and validation of the Theoretical Orientation Scale for Clinicians: reflecting solution-focused principles, Assessment, 8(3), 301-313.
36. Pillote, W. J. & Gable, R. K. (1990) The impact of positive and negative item stems on the validity of a computer anxiety scale, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 50(3), 603-610.
37. Pinsoneault, T. B. (1998) A Variable Response Inconsistency Scale and a True Response Inconsistency Scale for the Jesness Inventory, Psychological Assessment, 10, 21-32.
38. Raju, N. S., Bode, R. K. & Larsen, V. S. (1989) An empirical assessment of the Mantel-Haenszel statistic for studying differential item performance, Applied Measurement in Education, 2, 1-13.
39. Rorer, L. G. (1965) The great response-style myth, Psychological Bulletin, 63(3), 129-156.
40. Rundquist, E. A. (1966) Item and response characteristics in attitude and personality measurement: a reaction to L. G. Rorer's 'The Great Response-Style Myth', Psychological Bulletin, 66, 166-177.
41. Schmitt, N. & Stults, D. M. (1985) Factors defined by negatively keyed items: the result of careless respondents? Applied Psychological Measurement, 9(4), 367-373.
42. Schriesheim, C. A. & Hill, K. D. (1981) Controlling acquiescence response bias by item reversals: the effect on questionnaire validity, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 1101-1114.
43. Schuman, H. & Presser, S. (1981) Questions and answers in attitude surveys: experiments on question form, wording, and context (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage).
44. Simpson, R. D., Rentz, R. R. & Shrum, J. W. (1976) Influence of instrument characteristics on student responses in attitude assessment, Journal of Research on Science Teaching, 13, 275-281.
45. Spector, P. E. (1992) Summated rating scale construction: an introduction (Newbury Park, CA, Sage).
46. Topf, M. (1986) Response sets in questionnaire research, Nursing Research, 35, 119-121.
47. Weems, G. H., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Schreiber, J. B. & Eggers, S. J. (2003) Characteristics of respondents who respond differently to positively and negatively worded items on rating scales, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(6), 587-607.
48. Zuckerman, M., Knee, C. R., Hodgins, H. S. & Miyake, K. (1995) Hypothesis confirmation: the joint effect of positive test strategy and acquiescence response set, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 52-60.