Methodological considerations regarding response bias effect in substance use research: Is correlation between the measured variables sufficient?

Substance Abuse: Treatment, Prevention, and Policy

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2011, Pages

  Petróczi, Andrea ^a,b   Nepusz, Tamás ^a,c  

^a KINGSTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; DOPING; EPIDEMIOLOGY; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SELF DISCLOSURE; SELF REPORT; SOCIAL DESIRABILITY; STANDARD; STATISTICS;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DOPING IN SPORTS; EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; HUMANS; SELF DISCLOSURE; SELF REPORT; SOCIAL DESIRABILITY;

EID: 78651445649     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1747597X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1747-597X-6-1     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Denham BE. Determinants of anabolic-androgenic steroid risk perceptions in youth populations: a multivariate analysis. J Health Soc Behav 2009, 50:277-292. 10.1177/002214650905000303, 19711806.
2. Dodge T, Jaccard JJ. Is abstinence an alternative? Predicting adolescent athletes' intentions to use performance enhancing substances. J Health Psychol 2008, 13(5):703-711. 10.1177/1359105307082460, 18519443.
3. Donovan RJ, Egger G, Kapernick V, Mendoza J. A conceptual framework for achieving performance enhancing drug compliance in sport. Sports Med 2002, 32:269-284. 10.2165/00007256-200232040-00005, 11929355.
4. Dunn M, Mazanov J, Sitharthan G. Predicting future anabolic-androgenic steroid use intentions with current substance use: findings from an Internet-based survey. Clin J Sport Med 2009, 19(3):222-227. 10.1097/JSM.0b013e31819d65ad, 19423975.
5. Goulet C, Valois P, Buist A, Côté M. Predictors of the use of performance-enhancing substances by young athletes. Clin J Sport Med 2010, 20(4):243-248. 10.1097/JSM.0b013e3181e0b935, 20606508.
6. Laure P, Lecerf T, Friser A, Binsinger C. Drugs, recreational drug use and attitudes towards doping of high school athletes. Int J Sports Med 2004, 25:133-138. 10.1055/s-2004-819946, 14986197.
7. Laure P, Favre A, Binisinger C, Mangin G. Can self-assertion be targeted in doping prevention actions among adolescent athletes? A randomized controlled trial. Serbian J Sport Sci 2009, 3(3):105-110.
8. Litt D, Dodge T. A longitudinal investigation of the Drive for Muscularity Scale: predicting use of performance enhancing substances and weightlifting among males. Body Image 2008, 5(4):346-351. 10.1016/j.bodyim.2008.04.002, 18644753.
9. Lucidi F, Grano C, Leone L, Lombardo C, Pesce C. Determinants of the intention to use doping substances: An empirical contribution in a sample of Italian adolescents. Int J Sport Psychol 2004, 35:133-148.
10. Lucidi F, Zelli A, Mallia L, Grano C, Russo PM, Violani C. The social-cognitive mechanisms regulating adolescents' use of doping substances. J Sport Sci 2008, 26(5):447-456.
11. Peretti-Watel P, Guagliardo V, Verger P, Mignon P, Pruvost J, Obadia Y. Attitudes toward doping and recreational use among French elite student-athletes. Soc Sport J 2004, 21:1-17.
12. Petroczi A. Attitudes and doping: A structural equation analysis of the relationship between athletes' attitudes, sport orientation and doping behaviour. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 2007, 2:34. 10.1186/1747-597X-2-34, 2217289, 17996097.
13. Petróczi A, Aidman E. Psychological drivers in doping: The life-cycle model of performance enhancement. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 2008, 3:7. 2315642, 18331645.
14. Rees CR, Zarco EPT, Dawn K, Lewis DK. The steroids/sports supplements connection: pragmatism and sensation-seeking in the attitudes and behavior of JHS and HS students on Long Island. J Drug Educ 2008, 38(4):329-349. 10.2190/DE.38.4.b, 19438066.
15. Sas-Nowosielski K, Swiatkowska L. Goal orientations and attitudes toward doping. Int J Sport Med 2008, 29(7):607-612.
16. Shakeri J, Parvizifard AA, Sadeghi K, Kaviani S, Hashemian AH. Cognitive correlations and psychological morbidities of doping in adolescent athletes in Kermanshah, Iran. Iranian J Psychiatry Behav Sci 2009, 3(1):38-43.
17. Strelan P, Boeckmann RJ. A new model for understanding performance enhancing drug use by elite athletes. J Appl Sport Psychol 2003, 15:176-183.
18. Strelan P, Boeckmann RJ. Why drug testing in elite sport does not work: perceptual deterrence theory and the role of personal moral beliefs. J Appl Soc Psychol 2006, 36:2909-2934.
19. Wichstrom L, Pedersen W. Use of anabolic-androgenic steroids in adolescence: winning, looking good or being bad?. J Stud Alcohol 2001, 62(1):5-13.
20. Wiefferink CH, Detmar SB, Coumans B, Vogels T, Paulussen TGW. Social psychological determinants of the use of performance-enhancing drugs by gym users. Health Educ Res 2008, 23(1):70-80. 10.1093/her/cym004, 17301058.
21. Zelli A, Mallia L, Lucidi F. The contribution of interpersonal appraisals to a social-cognitive analysis of adolescents' doping use. Psych Sport Exerc 2010, 11(4):304-311.
22. Backhouse S, McKenna J, Robinson S, Atkin A. Attitudes, behaviours, knowledge and education - Drugs in sport: past, present and future. 2007, http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/Backhouse_et_al_Full_Report.pdf
23. Goldberg L, Elliot D, Clarke GN, MacKinnon DP, Moe E, Zoref L, Green C, Wolf SL, Greffrath E, Miller DJ, Lapin A. Effects of a multidimensional anabolic steroid prevention intervention. The Adolescents Training and Learning to Avoid Steroids (ATLAS) Program. JAMA 1996, 276(19):1555-1562. 10.1001/jama.276.19.1555, 8918852.
24. Elliot DL, Goldberg L, Moe EL, Defrancesco CA, Durham MB, Hix-Small H. Preventing substance use and disordered eating: initial outcomes of the ATHENA (athletes targeting healthy exercise and nutrition alternatives) program. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2004, 158(11):1043-1049. 10.1001/archpedi.158.11.1043, 15520341.
25. Elliot DL, Goldberg L, Moe EL, DeFrancesco CA, Durham MB, McGinnis W, Lockwood C. Long-term outcomes of the ATHENA (Athletes Targeting Healthy Exercise & Nutrition Alternatives) Program for female high school athletes. J Alcohol Drug Educ 2008, 52(2):73-92. 2598770, 19081833.
26. Goldberg L, Elliot DL, MacKinnon DP, Moe EL, Kuehl KS, Yoon M, Taylor A, Williams J. Outcomes of a prospective trial of student-athlete drug testing: the Student Athlete Testing Using Random Notification (SATURN) study. J Adolesc Health 2007, 41:421-429. 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.08.001, 17950161.
27. Goldberg L, Elliot DL. Preventing substance use among high school athletes. The ATLAS and ATHENA Programs. J Appl School Psychol 2005, 21(2):63-87.
28. Goldberg L, MacKinnon DP, Elliot DL, Moe EL, Clarke G, Cheong J. The adolescents training and learning to avoid steroids program: preventing drug use and promoting health behaviors. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2000, 154(4):332-338.
29. Kuehn BM. Teen steroid, supplement use targeted. Officials look to prevention and better oversight. JAMA 2009, 302(21):2301-2303. 10.1001/jama.2009.1711, 19952311.
30. Ranby KW, Aiken LS, Mackinnon DP, Elliot DL, Moe EL, McGinnis W, Goldberg L. A mediation analysis of the ATHENA intervention for female athletes: prevention of athletic-enhancing substance use and unhealthy weight loss behaviors. J Pediatr Psychol 2009, 34(10):1069-1083. 10.1093/jpepsy/jsp025, 2782253, 19386771.
31. Paulhus DL, Vazire S. The self-report method. Handbook of research methods in personality psychology 2010, 224-239. New York: Guilford, Robins RW, Fraley RC, Kruger RF.
32. Paulhus DL. Measurement and control of response bias. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes 1991, 1:17-59. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, Robinson JP, Shaver PR, Wrightsman LS.
33. Lentillon-Kastner V, Ohl F. Can we measure accurately the prevalence of doping?. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2010,
34. Paulhus DL. Socially desirable responding the evolution of a construct. The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement 2002, 49-69. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, Braun HI, Jackson DN, Wiley DE.
35. McCrae RR, Costa PT. Social desirability scales: more substance than style. J Consult Clin Psychol 1983, 51(6):882-888.
36. Petróczi A, Aidman EV, Hussain I, Deshmukh N, Nepusz T, Uvacsek M, Tóth M, Barker J, Naughton DP. Virtue or pretense? Looking behind self-declared innocence in doping. PLoS One 2010, 5(5):e10457. 2864761, 20463978.
37. Tourangeau R, Yan T. Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol Bulletin 2007, 133:859-883.
38. Uziel L. Rethinking social desirability scales: from impression management to interpersonally oriented self-control. Perspectives Psychol Sci 2010, 5:243.
39. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioural research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Applied Psychol 2003, 88(5):879-903.
40. Ganster DC, Hennessey HW, Luthans F. Social desirability response effects: Three alternative models. Acad Management J 1983, 26:321-331.
41. Williams LJ, Anderson SE. An alternative approach to methods effects by using latent-variable models: applications in organizational behavior research. J Applied Psychol 1994, 79(3):323-331.
42. Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol 1986, 51:1173-1182. 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173, 3806354.
43. Kline TJB, Sulsky LM, Rever-Moriyama SD. Common method variance and specific errors: a practical approach to detection. J Psychol 2000, 134:401-421. 10.1080/00223980009598225, 10908073.
44. Sobell LC, Sobell MB. Timeline Follow-back: a technique for assessing self-reported ethanol consumption. Measuring alcohol consumption: psychosocial and biological methods 1992, 41-72. Totowa, NJ:Humana Press, Allen J, Litten RZ, 1992..
45. Sobell LC, Brown J, Leo GI, Sobell MB. The reliability of the Alcohol Timeline Followback when administered by telephone and by computer. Drug Alcohol Dependency 1996, 42:49-54.
46. Yudko E, Lozkhina O, Fouts A. A comprehensive review of the psychometric properties of the Drug Abuse Screening Test. J Subst Abuse Treatment 2007, 32:189-198.
47. Dhalla S, Kopec JA. The CAGE Questionnaire for alcohol misuse: a review of reliability and validity studies. Clin Investigative Med 2007, 30(1):33-41.
48. Bashford J, Flett R, Copeland J. The Cannabis Use Problems Identification Test (CUPIT): development, reliability, concurrent and predictive validity among adolescents and adults. Addiction 2010, 105:615-625. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02859.x, 20403014.
49. Musshoff F, Driever F, Lachenmeier K, Lachenmeier DW, Banger M, Madea B. Results of hair analyses for drugs of abuse and comparison with self-reports and urine tests. Forensic Sci Int 2006, 156:118-123. 10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.07.024, 16410161.
50. Legerwood DM, Goldberger BA, Risk NK, Lewis CE, Price RK. Comparison between self-report and hair analysis of illicit drug use in a community sample of middle-aged men. Addictive Behav 2008, 33:1131-1139.
51. Delaney-Black V, Chiodo LM, Hannigan JH, Greenwald MK, Janiss J, Patterson G, Huestis MA, Ager J, Sokol RJ. References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must this article Just say "I don't": lack of concordance between teen report and biological measures of drug use. Pediatrics 2010, References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must this article.
52. Petroczi A, Aidman EV. Measuring explicit attitude as an indicator of athletes' engagement in doping: Review of the psychometric properties of the Performance Enhancement Attitude Scale. Psych Sport Exerc 2009, 10:390-396.
53. Crowne DP, Marlowe D. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. J Cons Psychol 1960, 24:349-354.
54. R Development Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2010, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, ISBN: 3-90051-07-0, R Development Core Team.
55. Fox J. Structural equation modeling with SEM package in R. Struct Equat Model 2006, 13:465-486.
56. Maassen GH, Bakker AB. Suppressor variables in path models. Soc Methods Res 2001, 30:241-270.
57. Gucciardi DF, Jalleh G, Donovan RJ. Does social desirability influence the relationship between doping attitudes and doping susceptibility in athletes?. Psych Sport Exerc 2010, 11(6):479-486.
58. Payne BK, Gawronski B. A history of implicit social cognition: where is it coming from? Where is it going?. Handbook of implicit social cognition: measurement, theory, and applications 2010, 1-8. New York, NY:Guilford Press, Gawronski B, Payne K.
59. De Houwer J, Teige-Mocigemba S, Spruyt A, Moors A. Implicit measures: a normative analysis and review. Psychol Bulletin 2009, 135(3):347-368.
60. Gawronski B. Ten frequently asked questions about implicit measures and their frequently supposed, but not entirely correct answers. Canadian Psychol 2009, 50(3):141-150.
61. Schnabel K, Asendorpf JB, Greenwald AG. Assessment of individual differences in implicit cognition. Eur J Psychol Assessment 2008, 24:210-217.
62. Greenwald AG, Poehlman TA, Uhlmann E, Banaji MR. Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. J Personality Social Psychol 2009, 97:17-41.