Asking sensitive questions: The impact of forgiving wording and question context on social desirability bias

Quality and Quantity

Volumn 46, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 1601-1616

  Näher, Anatol Fiete ^a   Krumpal, Ivar ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Context effects; Sensitive questions; Social desirability

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863557238     PISSN: 00335177     EISSN: 15737845     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11135-011-9469-2     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Aquilino W. S., Wright D. L., Supple A. J.: Response effects due to bystander presence in casi and paper-and-pencil surveys of drug use and alcohol use. Subst. Use Misuse 35, 845-867 (2000).
2. Aronson E.: Dissonance, hypocrisy and the self-concept. In: Harmon-Jones, E., Mills, J. (eds) Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on a Pivotal Theory in Social Psychology, pp. 103-106. APA, Washington (1999).
3. Aronson E., Fried C. B., Stone J.: Overcoming denial and increasing the intention to use condoms through the induction of hypocrisy. Am. J. Public Health 81, 1636-1638 (1991).
4. Barton A. H.: Asking the embarrassing question. Public Opin. Q. 22, 67-68 (1958).
5. Becker R.: Selective response to questions on delinquency. Qual. Quant. 40, 483-498 (2006).
6. Becker R., Günther R.: Selektives Antwortverhalten bei Fragen zum delinquenten Handeln. Eine empirische Studie über die Wirksamkeit der "sealed envelope technique" bei selbstberichteter Delinquenz mit Daten des ALLBUS 2000. ZUMA-Nachrichten 54, 39-59 (2004).
7. Belli R. F., Traugott M. W., Beckmann M. N.: What leads to voting overreports? Contrasts of overreporters to validated votes and admitted nonvoters in the American national election studies. J. Off. Stat. 21, 287-308 (2001).
8. Belli R. F., Moore S. E., VanHoewyk J.: An experimental comparison of question forms used to reduce vote overreporting. Elect. Stud. 25, 751-759 (2006).
9. Beuer-Krüssel M., Krumpal I.: Der Einfluss von Häufigkeitsformaten auf die Messung von subjektiven Wahrscheinlichkeiten. Methoden, Daten, Analysen: Zeitschrift für empirische Sozialforschung 3, 31-58 (2009).
10. Beyer H., Krumpal I.: "Aber es gibt keine Antisemiten mehr": Eine experimentelle Studie zur Kommunikationslatenz antisemitischer Einstellungen. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 62, 681-705 (2010).
11. Blair E., Sudman S., Bradburn N. M., Stocking C.: How to ask questions about drinking and sex: response effects in measuring consumer behavior. J. Mark. Res. 14, 316-321 (1977).
12. Cantril H., Wilks S. S.: Problems and techniques. Public Opin. Q. 4, 330-338 (1940).
13. Catania J. A., Binson D., Canchola J., Pollack L. M., Hauck W.: Effects of interviewer gender, interviewer choice, and item wording on responses to questions concerning sexual behavior. Public Opin. Q. 60, 345-375 (1996).
14. Coutts E., Jann B.: Sensitive questions in online surveys: experimental results for the Randomized Response Technique (RRT) and the Unmatched Count Technique (UCT) Working paper. Working paper, ETH Zürich (2008).
15. Coutts E., Jann B.: Sensitive questions in online surveys: experimental results for the Randomized Response Technique (RRT) and the Unmatched Count Technique (UCT). Sociol. Methods Res. 40, 169-193 (2011).
16. Crowne D. P., Marlowe D.: A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. J. Consult. Psychol. 24, 349-354 (1960).
17. Diekmann A.: Empirische Sozialforschung. Grundlagen, Methoden, Anwendungen. Rowohlt Taschenbuch, Reinbek (2003).
18. Edwards A. L.: The relationship between the judged desirability of a trait and the probability that the trait will be endorsed. J. Appl. Psychol. 2, 90-93 (1953).
19. Festinger L.: A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford (1957).
20. Fointiat V.: Being together in a situation of induced hypocrisy. Curr. Res. Soc. Psychol. 13, 145-153 (2008).
21. Fowler F. J.: Improving Survey Questions. Design and Evaluation. Sage Publications, London (1995).
22. Frey D., Gaska A.: Die Theorie der kognitiven Dissonanz. In: Frey, D., Irle, M. (eds) Theorien der Sozialpsychologie, pp. 274-324. Hans Huber, Bern (1993).
23. Fu, H., Darroch, J. E., Henshaw, S. K., Kolb, E.: Measuring the extent of abortion underreporting in the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth. Fam. Plan. Perspect. 30, 128-133, 138 (1995).
24. Groves R. M., Fowler F. J., Couper M. P., Lepkowski J. M., Singer E., Tourangeau R.: Survey Methodology. Wiley, Hoboken (2004).
25. Hartmann P.: Response behavior in interview settings of limited privacy. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 7, 383-390 (1995).
26. Holtgraves T., Eck J., Lasky B.: Face management, question wording and social desirability. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 27, 1650-1671 (1997).
27. Huang C., Liao H., Chang S.-H.: Social desirability and the clinical self-report inventory: methodological reconsideration. J. Clin. Psychol. 54, 517-528 (1998).
28. Jann, B., Jerke, J., Krumpal, I.: Asking sensitive questions using the crosswise model: an experimental survey measuring plagiarism. Public Opin. Q. (forthcoming).
29. Johnson T. J., van de ijver F. J.: Social desirability in cross-cultural research. In: Harness, J., van de ijver, F. J., Mohler, P. (eds) Cross-Cultural Survey Methods, pp. 193-202. Wiley, New York (2002).
30. Krumpal, I.: Evaluation of the effectiveness of the Randomized Response Technique and the Item Count Method in the telephone survey mode. In: Balbi, S., Scepi, G., Russolillo, G., Stawinoga, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Social Science Methodology, RC33-Logic and Methodology in Sociology (ISA). Jovene Editore, Napoli (2008).
31. Krumpal, I., Rauhut, H., Böhr, D., Naumann. E.: The framing of risks and the communication of subjective probabilities for victimizations. Qual. Quant. (forthcoming).
32. Nicotera A. M.: An assessment of the argumentativeness scale for social desirability bias. Commun. Rep. 9, 23-26 (1996).
33. Opp K.-D.: Norms. In: Baltes, P. B., Smelser, N. J. (eds) International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences, pp. 10714-10720. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001a).
34. Opp K.-D.: Social networks and the emergence of protest norms. In: Hechter, M., Opp, K.-D. (eds) Social Norms, pp. 234-273. Russell Sage Foundation, New York (2001b).
35. Paulhus D. L.: Two-component models of socially desirable responding. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 46, 598-609 (1984).
36. Paulhus D. L.: Socially desirable responding: the evolution of a construct. In: Braun, H. I., Jackson, D. N., Wiley, D. E. (eds) The Role of Constructs in Psychological and Educational Measurement, pp. 49-69. Erlbaum, Mahwah (2002).
37. Preisendörfer, P.: Heikle Fragen in mündlichen Interviews: Ergebnisse einer Methodenstudie im studentischen Milieu. Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz. Institute for Sociology. Working Paper (2008).
38. Presser S.: Can changes in context reduce vote overreporting in surveys?. Public Opin. Q. 54, 586-593 (1990).
39. Rauhut H., Krumpal I.: Die Durchsetzung sozialer Normen in Low-Cost- und High-Cost-Situationen. Z. für Soziol. 37, 380-402 (2008).
40. Reuband K. H.: Unerwünschte Dritte beim Interview: Erscheinungsformen und Folgen. Z. für Soziol. 16, 303-308 (1987).
41. Reuband K. H.: On 3rd persons in the interview situation and their impact on responses. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 4, 269-274 (1992).
42. Schwarz N., Bless H.: Scandals and the public trust in politicians: assimilation and contrast effects. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 18, 574-579 (1992).
43. Schwarz N., Bless H.: Mental construal processes: the inclusion/exclusion model. In: Stapel, D. A., Suls, J. (eds) Assimilation and Contrast in Social Psychology, pp. 119-141. Psychology Press, Philadelphia (2007).
44. Stapel D. A., Koomen W.: Impact of interpretation versus comparison mindsets on knowledge accessibility effects. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 37, 134-149 (2001).
45. Stapel D. A., Koomen W., van der ligt J.: Categories of category accessibility: the impact of trait concept versus exemplar priming on person judgements. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 33, 47-76 (1998).
46. Stocké V.: Deutsche Kurzskala des Bedürfnisses nach sozialer Anerkennung. In: Glöckner-Rist, A. (eds) Elektronisches Handbuch sozialwissenschaftlicher Erhebungsinstrumente. ZIS-Version 11. 0, GESIS, Bonn (2007).
47. Stocké V., Hunkler C.: Measures of desirability beliefs and their validity as indicators for socially desirable responding. Field Methods 19, 313-336 (2007).
48. Stone J., Wiegand A. W., Cooper J., Aronson E.: When exemplification fails: hypocrisy and the motive for self-integrity. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 72, 54-65 (1997).
49. Strack F., Schwarz N., Wänke M.: Semantic and pragmatic aspects of context effects in social and psychological research. Soc. Cogn. 9, 111-125 (1991).
50. Sudman S., Bradburn N. M.: Asking Questions: A Practical Guide to Questionnaire Design. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1982).
51. Sudman S., Bradburn N. M., Schwarz N.: Thinking about Answers. The Application of Cognitive Processes to Survey Methodology. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1996).
52. Tourangeau R., Smith T. W.: Asking sensitive questions: the impact of data collection mode, question format, and question context. Public Opin. Q. 60, 275-304 (1996).
53. Tourangeau R., Yan T.: Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol. Bull. 133, 859-883 (2007).
54. Tourangeau R., Rasinski K., Bradburn N. M., D'Andrade R.: Carry-over effects in attitude surveys. Public Opin. Q. 53, 495-524 (1989).
55. Tourangeau R., Rips L. J., Rasinski K. A.: The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000).
56. Traugott M. P., Katosh J. P.: Response validity in surveys of voting behavior. Public Opin. Q. 43, 359-377 (1979).
57. Voss T.: Game-theoretical perspectives on the emergence of social norms. In: Hechter, M., Opp, K.-D. (eds) Social Norms, pp. 105-136. Russell Sage Foundation, New York (2001).
58. Wolter, F.: Sensitive questions in surveys: an evaluation of the Randomized Response Technique in face-to-face-interviews. Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz. Institute for Sociology. Working Paper (2008).
59. Wyner, G. A.: Response errors in self-reported number of arrests. Sociol. Methods Res. 9: 161-177 (1980).