The Stability of Extreme Response Style and Acquiescence Over 8 Years

Assessment

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 279-291

  Wetzel, Eunike ^a,b   Lüdtke, Oliver ^c,d   Zettler, Ingo ^b,e   Böhnke, Jan R ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KONSTANZ   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

^c LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION   (Germany)

^d Center for International Student Assessment   (Germany)

^e UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^f UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

acquiescence; extreme response style; latent state model; latent trait state occasion model; response styles; TOSCA

Indexed keywords

FEMALE; HUMAN; INDIVIDUALITY; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MALE; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SELF REPORT;

FEMALE; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALITY; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; SELF REPORT; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84967341208     PISSN: 10731911     EISSN: 15523489     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1073191115583714     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. E.J.AustinI.J.DearyV.Egan (2006). Individual differences in response scale use: Mixed Rasch modelling of responses to NEO-FFI items. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1235-1245. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.10.018
2. J.G.BachmanP.M.O’Malley (1984). Yea-saying, nay-saying, and going to extremes: Black-White differences in response styles. Public Opinion Quarterly, 48, 491-509.
3. H.BaumgartnerJ.B.E.M.Steenkamp (2001). Response styles in marketing research: A cross-national investigation. Journal of Marketing Research, 28, 143-156.
4. P.M.Bentler (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
5. I.A.BergJ.S.Collier (1953). Personality and group differences in extreme response sets. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 13, 164-169. doi:10.1177/001316445301300202
6. C.BergmannF.Eder (2005). Allgemeiner Interessen-Struktur-Test mit Umwelt-Struktur-Test (AIST-R/ UST-R) [General Interest-Structure-Test]. Göttingen, Germany: Beltz Test.
7. U.Böckenholt (2012). Modeling multiple response processes in judgment and choice. Psychological Methods, 17, 665-678. doi:10.1037/a0028111
8. D.M.BoltT.R.Johnson (2009). Addressing score bias and differential item functioning due to individual differences in response style. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33, 335-352. doi:10.1177/0146621608329891
9. D.M.BoltJ.R.Newton (2011). Multiscale measurement of extreme response style. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 814-833. doi:10.1177/0013164410388411
10. P.BorkenauF.Ostendorf (1993). NEO-Fünf-Faktoren-Inventar [NEO Five Factor Inventory]. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
11. A.BrownA.Maydeu-Olivares (2011). Item response modeling of forced-choice questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 460-502. doi:10.1177/0013164410375112
12. M.W.BrowneR.Cudeck (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
13. R.J.CalsynL.A.RoadesD.S.Calsyn (1992). Acquiescence in needs assessment studies of the elderly. The Gerontologist, 32, 246-252.
14. L.G.Carr (1971). Srole items and acquiescence. American Sociological Review, 36, 287-293. doi:10.2307/2094045
15. D.A.ColeN.C.MartinJ.H.Steiger (2005). Empirical and conceptual problems with longitudinal trait-state models: Introducing a trait-state-occasion model. Psychological Methods, 10, 3-20. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.10.1.3
16. L.J.Cronbach (1946). Response sets and test validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6, 475-494. doi:10.1177/001316444600600405
17. L.J.Cronbach (1950). Further evidence on response sets and test design. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 10, 3-31. doi:10.1177/001316445001000101
18. J.P.DasT.Dutta (1969). Some correlates of extreme response set. Acta Psychologica, 29, 85-92. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(69)90005-5
19. R.DeinzerR.SteyerM.EidP.NotzP.SchwenkmezgerF.OstendorfA.Neubauer (1995). Situational effects in trait assessment: The FPI, NEOFFI, and EPI Questionnaires. European Journal of Personality, 9, 1-23. doi:10.1002/per.2410090102
20. M.B.DonnellanD.A.KennyK.H.TrzesniewskiR.E.LucasR.D.Conger (2012). Using trait-state models to evaluate the longitudinal consistency of global self-esteem from adolescence to adulthood. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 634-645. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2012.07.005
21. M.EidM.Rauber (2000). Detecting measurement invariance in organizational surveys. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 16, 20-30.
22. C.K.Enders (2001). A primer on maximum likelihood algorithms available for use with missing data. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 128-141. doi:10.1207/S15328007sem0801_7
23. G.A.Forehand (1962). Relationships among response sets and cognitive behaviors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 22, 287-302. doi:10.1177/001316446202200204
24. E.A.Greenleaf (1992). Measuring extreme response style. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56, 328-351.
25. G.H.Gudjonsson (1990). The relationship of intellectual skills to suggestibility, compliance and acquiescence. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 227-231. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(90)90236-K
26. M.HallquistJ.Wiley (2013). MplusAutomation: Automating Mplus model estimation and interpretation (Version R package version 0.6-1). Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MplusAutomation
27. L.T.HuP.M.Bentler (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424-453. doi:10.1037//1082-989x.3.4.424
28. L.T.HuP.M.Bentler (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
29. C.H.HuiH.C.Triandis (1989). Effects of culture and response format on extreme response style. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 20, 296-309. doi:10.1177/0022022189203004
30. C.KandlerW.BleidornR.RiemannF.M.SpinathW.ThielA.Angleitner (2010). Sources of cumulative continuity in personality: A longitudinal multiple-rater twin study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 995-1008. doi:10.1037/A0019558
31. D.A.KennyA.Zautra (1995). The trait-state-error model for multiwave data. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 52-59. doi:10.1037/0022-006x.63.1.52
32. D.A.KennyA.Zautra (2001). The trait-state models for longitudinal data. In (Eds.), New methods for the analysis of change (pp. 243-263). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
33. C.S.LightM.ZaxD.H.Gardiner (1965). Relationship of age, sex, and intelligence level to extreme response style. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 907-909.
34. I.Lorge (1937). Gen-like: Halo or reality?Psychological Bulletin, 34, 545-546.
35. G.MarinR.J.GambaB.V.Marin (1992). Extreme response style and acquiescence among Hispanics: The role of acculturation and education. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 23, 498-509. doi:10.1177/0022022192234006
36. G.N.Masters (1988). Measurement models for ordered response categories. In (Eds.), Latent trait and latent class models (pp. 11-29). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
37. A.Maydeu-OlivaresA.Brown (2010). Item response modeling of paired comparison and ranking data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 935-974. doi:10.1080/00273171.2010.531231
38. C.MohiyeddiniM.HautzingerS.Bauer (2002). Eine Latent-State-Trait-Analyse zur Bestimmung der dispositionellen und zustandsbedingten Anteile dreier Instrumente zur Erfassung von Depressionen: ADS, BDI und SDS [A latent state-trait analysis on assessing trait and state components of three instruments for measuring depression: ADS, BDI, and SDS]. Diagnostica, 48(1), 12-18. doi:10.1026//0012-1924.48.1.12
39. L.K.MuthénB.O.Muthén (1998-2014). Mplus [Computer software]. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. Retrieved from www.statmodel.com
40. B.D.NaemiD.J.BealS.C.Payne (2009). Personality predictors of extreme response styles. Journal of Personality, 77, 261-286. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00545.x
41. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2009). PISA 2006 technical report. Paris, France: OECD Publications.
42. F.OstendorfA.Angleitner (2004). NEO-PI-R: NEO-Persönlichkeitsinventar nach Costa und McCrae [NEO-PI-R: NEO Personality Inventory after Costa and McCrae]. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
43. R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/
44. B.W.RobertsW.F.DelVecchio (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 3-25. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.1.3
45. C.E.RossJ.Mirowsky (1984). Socially-desirable response and acquiescence in a cross-cultural survey of mental health. Journal of Health Social Behavior, 25, 189-197.
46. U.StangierT.HeidenreichA.BerardiU.GolbsJ.Hoyer (1999). Die Erfassung sozialer Phobie durch die Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS) und die Social Phobia Scale (SPS) [The measurement of social phobia with the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS) and the Social Phobia Scale (SPS)]. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, 28, 28-36.
47. J.H.Steiger (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173-180. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4
48. S.K.SterbaR.C.MacCallum (2010). Variability in parameter estimates and model fit across repeated allocations of items to parcels. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 322-358. doi:10.1080/00273171003680302
49. R.SteyerD.FerringM.Schmitt (1992). States and traits in psychological assessment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 8, 79-98.
50. R.SteyerM.SchmittM.Eid (1999). Latent state-trait theory and research in personality and individual differences. European Journal of Personality, 13, 389-408.
51. L.J.Stricker (1963). Acquiescence and social desirability response styles, item characteristics, and conformity. Psychological Reports, 12, 319-341.
52. U.TrautweinM.NeumannG.NagyO.LüdtkeK.Maaz (Eds.). (2010). Schulleistungen von Abiturienten: Die neu geordnete gymnasiale Oberstufe auf dem Prüfstand [School achievements of high school graduates: Putting the new high school structure to the test] Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
53. L.R.TuckerC.Lewis (1973). Reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor-analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1-10. doi:10.1007/Bf02291170
54. B.WeijtersM.GeuensN.Schillewaert (2010a). The individual consistency of acquiescence and extreme response style in self-report questionnaires. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 105-121. doi:10.1177/0146621609338593
55. B.WeijtersM.GeuensN.Schillewaert (2010b). The stability of individual response styles. Psychological Methods, 15, 96-110. doi:10.1037/a0018721
56. E.WetzelC.H.Carstensen (2015). Multidimensional modeling of traits and response styles. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000291.
57. E.WetzelC.H.CarstensenJ.R.Böhnke (2013). Consistency of extreme response style and non-extreme response style across traits. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 178-189. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2012.10.010
58. I.ZettlerJ.W.LangU.R.HülshegerB.E.Hilbig (2015). Dissociating indifferent, directional, and extreme responding in personality data: Applying the three-process model to self- and observer reports. Journal of Personality. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/jopy.12172