Social Media as a Tool for Data Collection: Examining Equivalence of Socially Value-Laden Constructs

Current Psychology

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 532-544

  Grieve, Rachel ^a   Witteveen, Kate ^b   Tolan, G Anne ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA   (Australia)

^b AUSTRALIAN CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Assessment; Equivalence; Facebook; Internet; Social media

Indexed keywords

EID: 84939893346     PISSN: 10461310     EISSN: 19364733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12144-014-9227-4     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Austin, E. J., Farrelly, D., Black, C., & Moore, H. (2007). Emotional intelligence, Machiavellianism and emotional manipulation: does EI have a dark side? Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 179–189. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.11.019.
2. Birnbaum, M. H. (2004). Human research and data collection via the internet. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 803–832.
3. Booth-Kewley, S., Larson, G. E., & Miyoshi, D. K. (2007). Social desirability effects on computerised and pencil-and-paper questionnaires. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 463–477. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.020.
4. Buchanan, T. (2001). Online personality assessment. In U. Reips & M. Bosnjak (Eds.), Dimensions of internet science (pp. 57–74). Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science.
5. Buchanan, T. (2002). Online assessment: desirable or dangerous? Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 33, 148–154.
6. Casler, K., Bickel, L., & Hackett, E. (2013). Separate but equal? A comparison of participants and data gathered via Amazon’s MTurk, social media, and face-to-face behavioral testing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2156–2160.
7. Chen, G. M. (2012). Why do women write personal blogs? Satisfying needs for self-disclosure and affiliation tell part of the story. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 171–180. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.024.
8. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.
9. Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of socially desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24(4), 349–354.
10. Forsyth, D. R. (1980). A taxonomy of ethical ideologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 175–184.
11. Forsyth, D. R., O’Boyle, E. H., & McDaniel, M. A. (2008). East meets West: a meta-analytic investigation of cultural variations in idealism and relativism. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 813–833.
12. Friborg, O., Barlaug, D., Martinussen, M., Rosenvinge, J. H., & Hjemdal, O. (2005). Resilience in relation to personality and intelligence. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 14(1), 29–42.
13. Grieve, R., & de Groot, H. T. (2011). Does online psychological test administration facilitate faking? Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 2386–2391. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.001.
14. Grieve, R., & Mahar, D. (2013). Can social intelligence be measured? psychometric properties of the tromsø social intelligence scale – english version. Irish Journal of Psychology, 34, 1–12.
15. Grieve, R., & Panebianco, L. (2013). Assessing the role of aggression, empathy, and self-serving cognitive distortions in trait emotional manipulation. Australian Journal of Psychology, 65, 79–88.
16. Grieve, R., Indian, M., Witteveen, K., Tolan, G. A., & Marrington, J. (2013). Face-to-face or Facebook? Can social connectedness be derived online? Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 604–609.
17. Hedman, E., Ljótsson, B., Rück, C., Furmack, T., Carlbring, P., Lindefors, N., et al. (2010). Internet administration of self-report measures commonly used in research on social anxiety disorder: A psychometric evaluation. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 736–740. doi:10.1013/j.chb.2010.01.010.
18. Indian, M., & Grieve, R. (2014). When Facebook is easier than face-to-face: Social support derived from Facebook in socially anxious individuals. Personality and Individual Differences, 59, 102–106.
19. Joinson, A. N., Woodley, A., & Reips, U. D. (2007). Personalization, authentication, and self-disclosure in self-administered internet surveys. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 275–285. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.10.012.
20. Jung, Y., Song, H., & Vorderer, P. (2012). Why do people post and read personal messages in public? the motivation of using personal blogs and its effects on users’ loneliness, belonging, and well-being. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1626–1633.
21. Kays, K., Gathercoal, K., & Buhrow, W. (2012). Does survey format influence disclosure on sensitive question items? Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 251–256. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.09.007.
22. Levenson, M. R., Kiehl, K. A., & Fitzpatrick, C. M. (1995). Assessing psychopathic attributes in a noninstitutionalised population. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(1), 151–158.
23. Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., & White, K. M. (2009). Internet versus paper-and-pencil survey methods in psychological experiments: equivalence testing of participant responses to health-related messages. Australian Journal of Psychology, 61(2), 107–116.
24. McAndrew, F. T., & Jeong, H. S. (2012). Who does what on Facebook? Age, sex, and relationship status as predictors of Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2359–2365.
25. Moeller, S. K., Robinson, M. D., Wilkowski, B. M., & Hanson, D. M. (2014). The big chill: interpersonal coldness and emotional labelling skills. Journal of Personality. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00738.x. accepted article.
26. Nadkarni, A., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Why do people use Facebook? Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 243–249.
27. Neumann, C. S., Hare, R. D., & Newman, J. P. (2007). The super-ordinate nature of the psychopathy checklist- revised. Journal of Personality Disorders, 21, 102–107.
28. Powell, A. L. (2013). Computer anxiety: comparison of research from the 1990s and 2000s. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2337–2381.
29. Risko, E. F., Quilty, L. C., & Oakman, J. M. (2006). Socially desirable responding on the Web: investigating the candor hypothesis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87(3), 269–276. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8703_08.
30. Ryan, R. S., Wilde, M., & Crist, S. (2013). Compared to a small, supervised lab experiment, a large, unsupervised web-based experiment on a previously unknown effect has benefits that outweigh its potential costs. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1295–1301.
31. Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., et al. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 167–177.
32. Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., & Bhullar, N. (2009). The assessing emotions scale. In C. Stough, J. D. A. Parker, & D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), Assessing emotional intelligence: theory, research, and applications. Dordrecht: Springer.
33. Silvera, D. H., Martinussen, M., & Dahl, T. I. (2001). The tromsø social intelligence scale, a self-report measure of social intelligence. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 42, 313–319.
34. Snodgrass, J. G., Lacy, M. G., Dengah, H. J. F., & Fagan, J. (2011). Enhancing one life rather than living two: playing MMOs with offline friends. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1211–1222. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.01.001.
35. Uriell, Z. A., & Dudley, C. M. (2009). Sensitive topics: are there modal differences? Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 76–87.
36. Williams, J. E., & McCord, D. M. (2006). Equivalence of standard and computerised versions of the raven progressive matrices test. Computers in Human Behaviour, 22, 791–800. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.005.
37. Yates, B. T., Wagner, J. L., & Suprenant, L. M. (1997). Recall of health-risky behaviors for the prior 2 or 4 weeks via computerised versus printed questionnaire. Computers in Human Behavior, 13, 83–110.