IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/psycho/v85y2020i1d10.1007_s11336-019-09689-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Social Desirability Item Response Theory Model: Retrieve–Deceive–Transfer

Author

Listed:
  • Cheng-Han Leng

    (National Taiwan University)

  • Hung-Yu Huang

    (University of Taipei)

  • Grace Yao

    (National Taiwan University)

Abstract

In this study, a new item response theory model is developed to account for situations in which respondents overreport or underreport their actual opinions on a positive or negative issue. Such behavior is supposed to be a result of deception and transfer mechanisms. In the proposed model, this behavior is simulated by incorporating a deception term into a multidimensional rating scale model, followed by multiplication by a transfer term, with the two operations performed by an indicator function and a transition matrix separately. The proposed model is presented in a Bayesian framework approximated by Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms. Through a series of simulations, the parameters of the proposed model are recovered accurately. The methodology is also implemented within an online experimental study to demonstrate the methodology’s application.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheng-Han Leng & Hung-Yu Huang & Grace Yao, 2020. "A Social Desirability Item Response Theory Model: Retrieve–Deceive–Transfer," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 85(1), pages 56-74, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:psycho:v:85:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11336-019-09689-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11336-019-09689-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11336-019-09689-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11336-019-09689-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mick, David Glen, 1996. "Are Studies of Dark Side Variables Confounded by Socially Desirable Responding? The Case of Materialism," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 23(2), pages 106-119, September.
    2. Lang, Frieder R. & John, Dennis & Lüdtke, Oliver & Schupp, Jürgen & Wagner, Gert G., 2011. "Short Assessment of the Big Five: Robust Across Survey Methods Except Telephone Interviewing," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 43(2), pages 548-567.
    3. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, September.
    4. Jobe, J.B. & Mingay, D.J., 1989. "Cognitive research improves questionnaires," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 79(8), pages 1053-1055.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paul Lowry & Clay Posey & Tom Roberts & Rebecca Bennett, 2014. "Is Your Banker Leaking Your Personal Information? The Roles of Ethics and Individual-Level Cultural Characteristics in Predicting Organizational Computer Abuse," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(3), pages 385-401, May.
    2. de Jong, M.G., 2006. "Response bias in international marketing research," Other publications TiSEM 5d4031be-97b5-4db3-962b-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Henssen, Bart & Voordeckers, Wim & Lambrechts, Frank & Koiranen, Matti, 2014. "The CEO autonomy–stewardship behavior relationship in family firms: The mediating role of psychological ownership," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 312-322.
    4. Fabian Kosse & Thomas Deckers & Pia Pinger & Hannah Schildberg-Hörisch & Armin Falk, 2020. "The Formation of Prosociality: Causal Evidence on the Role of Social Environment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(2), pages 434-467.
    5. Sweldens, Steven & Puntoni, Stefano & Paolacci, Gabriele & Vissers, Maarten, 2014. "The bias in the bias: Comparative optimism as a function of event social undesirability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 229-244.
    6. Beatrice Rammstedt & Frank M. Spinath & David Richter & Jürgen Schupp, 2013. "Personality Changes in Couples: Partnership Longevity and Personality Congruence in Couples," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 585, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    7. Mr Clive Boddy & Mr Derek Bond & Dr Elaine Ramsey, 2010. "Projective Techniques Are they a Victim of Clashing Paradigms," Accounting, Finance and Economics Research Group Working Papers 1, Ulster Business School.
    8. Frode Alfnes & Chengyan Yue & Helen H. Jensen, 2010. "Cognitive dissonance as a means of reducing hypothetical bias," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 37(2), pages 147-163, June.
    9. Ruvio, Ayalla A. & Shoham, Aviv, 2016. "Consumer arrogance: Scale development and validation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 3989-3997.
    10. Jie, Yun, 2020. "Responding to requests for help: Effects of payoff schemes with small monetary units," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    11. Datta Gupta, Nabanita & Lausten, Mette & Pozzoli, Dario, 2012. "Does Mother Know Best? Parental Discrepancies in Assessing Child Functioning," IZA Discussion Papers 6962, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Gabriel, Andreas & Rombach, Meike & Wieser, Hannah & Bitsch, Vera, 2021. "Got waste: knowledge, behavior and self-assessment on food waste of university students in Germany," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(6), February.
    13. Georges Steffgen & Philipp E. Sischka & Martha Fernandez de Henestrosa, 2020. "The Quality of Work Index and the Quality of Employment Index: A Multidimensional Approach of Job Quality and Its Links to Well-Being at Work," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-31, October.
    14. Ana León-Gómez & José Manuel Santos-Jaén & Daniel Ruiz-Palomo & Mercedes Palacios-Manzano, 2022. "Disentangling the impact of ICT adoption on SMEs performance: the mediating roles of corporate social responsibility and innovation," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 13(3), pages 831-866, September.
    15. Carvalho, Sergio W. & Fazel, Hesham & Trifts, Valerie, 2018. "Transgressing a group value in a transcultural experience: Immigrants' affective response to perceived social identity threats," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 326-333.
    16. Rimal, Arbindra & Fletcher, Stanley M. & McWatters, Kay H., 2000. "Nutrition Considerations In Food Selection," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 3(1), pages 1-16.
    17. Sjöstedt, Martin & Sundström, Aksel & Jagers, Sverker C. & Ntuli, Herbert, 2022. "Governance through community policing: What makes citizens report poaching of wildlife to state officials?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    18. Lergetporer, Philipp & Piopiunik, Marc & Simon, Lisa, 2021. "Does the education level of refugees affect natives’ attitudes?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    19. Burgstaller, Lilith & Feld, Lars P. & Pfeil, Katharina, 2022. "Working in the shadow: Survey techniques for measuring and explaining undeclared work," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 661-671.
    20. Sha Yang & Yi Zhao & Ravi Dhar, 2010. "Modeling the Underreporting Bias in Panel Survey Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 525-539, 05-06.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:psycho:v:85:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s11336-019-09689-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.