The Stability of Individual Response Styles

Psychological Methods

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 96-110

  Weijters, Bert ^a   Geuens, Maggie ^a,b   Schillewaert, Niels ^a  

^a VLERICK BUSINESS SCHOOL   (Belgium)

^b GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

latent state trait theory; longitudinal data; response styles; survey research

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EPIDEMIOLOGY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; STATISTICS;

CAUSALITY; HUMANS; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 77949621969     PISSN: 1082989X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0018721     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Anseel, F., Lievens, F., & Vermeulen, K. (2006, May). A meta-analysis of response rates in I/O psychology, management and marketing survey research, 1995-2000. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX.
2. Arbuckle J.L. AMOS 7.0 user's guide (2006), SPSS, Chicago, IL
3. Bachman J.G., and O'Malley P.M. Yea-saying, nay-saying, and going to extremes: Black-white differences in response styles. Public Opinion Quarterly 48 (1984) 491-509
4. Baumgartner H., and Steenkamp J.-B.E.M. Response styles in marketing research: A cross-national investigation. Journal of Marketing Research 38 (2001) 143-156
5. Baumgartner H., and Steenkamp J.-B.E.M. An extended paradigm for measurement analysis of marketing constructs applicable to panel data. Journal of Marketing Research 43 (2006) 431-442
6. Becker G. How important is transient error in estimating reliability? Going beyond simulation studies. Psychological Methods 5 (2000) 370-379
7. Bentler P. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin 107 (1990) 238-246
8. Billiet J.B., and Davidov E. Testing the stability of an acquiescence style factor behind two interrelated substantive variables in a panel design. Sociological Methods & Research 36 (2008) 542-562
9. Browne M.W., and Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen K.A., and Long J.S. (Eds). Testing structural equation models (1993), Sage, Newbury Park, CA 136-162
10. Bruner II G.C., James K.E., and Hensel P.J. Marketing scales handbook: A compilation of multi-item measures 3 (2001), American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL
11. Cole D.A., Ciesla J.A., and Steiger J.H. The insidious effects of failing to include design-driven correlated residuals in latent-variable covariance structure analysis. Psychological Methods 12 (2007) 381-398
12. Cole D.A., Martin N.C., and Steiger J.H. Empirical and conceptual problems with longitudinal trait-state models: Introducing a trait-state-occasion model. Psychological Methods 10 (2005) 3-20
13. Curran P.J., West S.G., and Finch J.F. The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods 1 (1996) 16-29
14. De Beuckelaer, A., Weijters, B., & Rutten, A. (in press). Using ad hoc measures for response styles: A cautionary note. Quality & Quantity. Advance online publication: doi:10.1007/s11135-009-9225-z
15. De Jong M.G., Steenkamp J.-B.E.M., Fox J.-P., and Baumgartner H. Using item response theory to measure extreme response style in marketing research: A global investigation. Journal of Marketing Research 45 (2008) 104-115
16. Deutskens E.C., de Ruyter K., Wetzels M.G.M., and Oosterveld P. Response rate and response quality of Internet-based surveys: An experimental study. Marketing Letters 15 (2004) 21-36
17. Drolet A., and Morrison D.G. Do we really need multiple-item measures in service research?. Journal of Service Research 3 (2001) 196-204
18. Enders C.K. The impact of nonnormality on full information maximum-likelihood estimation for structural equation models with missing data. Psychological Methods 6 (2001) 352-370
19. Feldman J.M., and Lynch Jr. J.G. Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology 73 (1988) 421-435
20. Ferrando P.J. An IRT-based two-wave model for studying short-term stability in personality measurement. Applied Psychological Measurement 26 (2002) 286-301
21. Greenleaf E.A. Improving rating scale measures by detecting and correcting bias components in some response styles. Journal of Marketing Research 29 (1992) 176-188
22. Greer T., and Dunlap W.P. Analysis of variance with ipsative measures. Psychological Methods 2 (1997) 200-207
23. Horran P.M., DiStefano C., and Motl R.W. Wording effects in self-esteem scales: Methodological artifact or response style?. Structural Equation Modeling 10 (2003) 435-455
24. Hoyt W.T. Rater bias in psychological research: When is it a problem and what can we do about it?. Psychological Methods 5 (2000) 64-86
25. Hu L., and Bentler P.M. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods 3 (1998) 424-453
26. Hui C.H., and Triandis H.C. Effects of culture and response format on extreme response style. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 20 (1989) 296-309
27. Javaras K.N., and Ripley B.D. An "unfolding" latent variable model for Likert attitude data: Drawing inferences adjusted for response style. Journal of the American Statistical Association 102 (2007) 454-463
28. Johnson T., Kulesa P., Cho Y.I., and Shavitt S. The relation between culture and response styles: Evidence from 19 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 36 (2005) 264-277
29. Kahle L.R., Beatty S.E., and Homer P.M. Alternative measurement approaches to consumer values: The List of Values (LOV) and Values and Life Style (VALS). Journal of Consumer Research 13 (1986) 405-409
30. Knäuper B. The impact of age and education on response order effects in attitude measurement. Public Opinion Quarterly 63 (1999) 347-370
31. Krosnick J.A. Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology 5 (1991) 213-236
32. Little T.D., Cunningham W.A., Shahar G., and Widaman K.F. To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling 9 (2002) 151-173
33. Little T.D., Lindenberger U., and Nesselroade J.R. On selecting indicators for multivariate measurement and modeling with latent variables: When "good" indicators are bad and "bad" indicators are good. Psychological Methods 4 (1999) 192-211
34. Marín G., Gamba R.J., and Marín B.V. Extreme response style and acquiescence among Hispanics: The role of acculturation and education. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 23 (1992) 498-509
35. Marsh H.W. Positive and negative global self-esteem: A substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (1996) 810-819
36. McClendon M.J. Acquiescence: Tests of the cognitive limitations and question ambiguity hypotheses. Journal of Official Statistics 7 (1991) 153-166
37. Mirowsky J., and Ross C.E. Eliminating defense and agreement bias from measures of the sense of control: A 2 × 2 index. Social Psychology Quarterly 54 (1991) 127-145
38. Motl R.W., and DiStefano C. Longitudinal invariance of self-esteem and method effects associated with negatively worded items. Structural Equation Modeling 9 (2002) 562-578
39. Muthén B.O. Beyond SEM: General latent variable modeling. Behaviormetrika 29 (2002) 81-117
40. Muthén B.O., and Curran P.J. General longitudinal modeling of individual differences in experimental designs: A latent variable framework for analysis and power estimation. Psychological Methods 2 (1997) 371-402
41. Muthén L.K., and Muthén B.O. Mplus user's guide. 4th ed. (2006), Author, Los Angeles, CA
42. Osgood C.E. Ease of individual judgment-processes in relation to polarization of attitudes in the culture. Journal of Social Psychology 14 (1941) 403-418
43. Paulhus D.L. Measurement and control of response bias. In: Robinson J.P., Shaver P.R., and Wrightsman L.S. (Eds). Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (1991), Academic Press, San Diego, CA 17-59
44. Podsakoff P.M., MacKenzie S.B., Lee J.-Y., and Podsakoff N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (2003) 879-903
45. Robinson J.P., Shaver P.R., and Wrightsman L.S. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (1991), Academic Press, San Diego, CA
46. Schafer J.L., and Graham J.W. Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods 7 (2002) 147-177
47. Schermelleh-Engel K., Keith N., Moosbrugger H., and Hodapp V. Decomposing person and occasion-specific effects: An extension of latent state-trait (LST) theory to hierarchical LST models. Psychological Methods 9 (2004) 198-219
48. Shadish W.R. Revisiting field experimentation: Field notes for the future. Psychological Methods 7 (2002) 3-18
49. Steiger J.H. Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research 25 (1990) 173-180
50. Steyer R., Schmitt M., and Eid M. Latent state-trait theory and research in personality and individual differences. European Journal of Personality 13 (1999) 389-408
51. Tisak J., and Tisak M.S. Permanency and ephemerality of psychological measures with application to organizational commitment. Psychological Methods 5 (2000) 175-198
52. Tucker L.R., and Lewis C. A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika 38 (1973) 1-10
53. van Herk H., Poortinga Y.H., and Verhallen T.M.M. Response styles in rating scales: Evidence of method bias in data from six EU countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 35 (2004) 346-360
54. Weijters B., Schillewaert N., and Geuens M. Assessing response styles across modes of data collection. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 36 (2008) 409-422