IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0215898.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extreme response style bias in burn survivors

Author

Listed:
  • Pengsheng Ni
  • Molly Marino
  • Emily Dore
  • Lily Sonis
  • Colleen M Ryan
  • Jeffrey C Schneider
  • Alan M Jette
  • Lewis E Kazis

Abstract

This paper explores extreme response style to the Life Impact Burn Recovery Evaluation (LIBRE) Profile, a measure of social participation in burn survivors. We fit a Multidimensional Generalized Partial Credit Model (MGPCM) with a positive extreme response style (PERS) factor and compared this model with the original MGPCM, estimated the impact that PERS has on scores, and examined the personal characteristics that may result in an individual more likely to respond in a fashion that would inflate their true low scores. The average impact of the PERS, based upon the root mean squared bias, ranged from 0.27 to 0.50 of a standard deviation of the scale. Individuals who were older, had participated in a burn survivor support group, and had selected to self-administer the measure were less likely to have a high PERS bias that masks low scores. Future work can consider PERS when measuring the psychosocial impacts of burn injuries and other health conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Pengsheng Ni & Molly Marino & Emily Dore & Lily Sonis & Colleen M Ryan & Jeffrey C Schneider & Alan M Jette & Lewis E Kazis, 2019. "Extreme response style bias in burn survivors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-13, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0215898
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215898
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215898
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215898&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0215898?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weijters, Bert & Cabooter, Elke & Schillewaert, Niels, 2010. "The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 236-247.
    2. Nowlis, Stephen M & Kahn, Barbara E & Dhar, Ravi, 2002. "Coping with Ambivalence: The Effect of Removing a Neutral Option on Consumer Attitude and Preference Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(3), pages 319-334, December.
    3. Mingnan Liu & Frederick G. Conrad & Sunghee Lee, 2017. "Comparing acquiescent and extreme response styles in face-to-face and web surveys," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 941-958, March.
    4. Natalia Kieruj & Guy Moors, 2013. "Response style behavior: question format dependent or personal style?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 193-211, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dirk Tempelaar & Bart Rienties & Quan Nguyen, 2020. "Subjective data, objective data and the role of bias in predictive modelling: Lessons from a dispositional learning analytics application," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-29, June.

    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. Elke Cabooter & Bert Weijters & Alain Beuckelaer & Eldad Davidov, 2017. "Is extreme response style domain specific? Findings from two studies in four countries," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2605-2622, November.
    2. Cabooter, Elke & Weijters, Bert & Geuens, Maggie & Vermeir, Iris, 2016. "Scale format effects on response option interpretation and use," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2574-2584.
    3. Luis Márquez & Víctor Cantillo & Julián Arellana, 2020. "Assessing the influence of indicators’ complexity on hybrid discrete choice model estimates," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 373-396, February.
    4. Yingbin Zhang & Zhaoxi Yang & Yehui Wang, 2022. "The Impact of Extreme Response Style on the Mean Comparison of Two Independent Samples," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, June.
    5. Eline Moens & Louis Lippens & Philippe Sterkens & Johannes Weytjens & Stijn Baert, 2022. "The COVID-19 crisis and telework: a research survey on experiences, expectations and hopes," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(4), pages 729-753, June.
    6. Stylos, Nikolaos & Vassiliadis, Chris A. & Bellou, Victoria & Andronikidis, Andreas, 2016. "Destination images, holistic images and personal normative beliefs: Predictors of intention to revisit a destination," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 40-60.
    7. Jennifer Oser & Marc Hooghe & Zsuzsa Bakk & Roberto Mari, 2023. "Changing citizenship norms among adolescents, 1999-2009-2016: A two-step latent class approach with measurement equivalence testing," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(5), pages 4915-4933, October.
    8. Weijters, Bert & Cabooter, Elke & Schillewaert, Niels, 2010. "The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 236-247.
    9. repec:cup:judgdm:v:2:y:2007:i::p:48-53 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Sánchez, Gonzalo E. & Rhodes, Lauren A. & Espinoza, Nereyda E. & Borja, Viviana, 2022. "Assessing the Gap between Social and Individual Perceptions of Sexual Harassment," MPRA Paper 112711, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Reich, Taly & Fulmer, Alexander G. & Dhar, Ravi, 2022. "In the face of self-threat: Why ambivalence heightens people’s willingness to act," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    12. Sandra Cortés & Soledad Burgos & Héctor Adaros & Boris Lucero & Lesliam Quirós-Alcalá, 2021. "Environmental Health Risk Perception: Adaptation of a Population-Based Questionnaire from Latin America," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-13, August.
    13. Stylos, Nikolaos & Bellou, Victoria & Andronikidis, Andreas & Vassiliadis, Chris A., 2017. "Linking the dots among destination images, place attachment, and revisit intentions: A study among British and Russian tourists," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 15-29.
    14. Marcella Corduas & Alfonso Piscitelli, 2017. "Modeling university student satisfaction: the case of the humanities and social studies degree programs," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 617-628, March.
    15. Werner Bönte & Sandro Lombardo & Diemo Urbig, 2016. "Economics meets Psychology:Experimental and self-reported Measures of Individual Competitiveness," Schumpeter Discussion Papers SDP16006, Universitätsbibliothek Wuppertal, University Library.
    16. Paola Annoni & Nicholas Charron, 2019. "Measurement Assessment in Cross-Country Comparative Analysis: Rasch Modelling on a Measure of Institutional Quality," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 31-60, January.
    17. Carla Heloisa de Faria Domingues & João Augusto Rossi Borges & Clandio Favarini Ruviaro & Diego Gomes Freire Guidolin & Juliana Rosa Mauad Carrijo, 2020. "Understanding the factors influencing consumer willingness to accept the use of insects to feed poultry, cattle, pigs and fish in Brazil," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-11, April.
    18. Gerhard Tutz & Moritz Berger, 2016. "Response Styles in Rating Scales," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 41(3), pages 239-268, June.
    19. Tahrir Jaber & Elin M. Oftedal, 2020. "Legitimacy for Sustainability: A Case of A Strategy Change for An Oil and Gas Company," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, January.
    20. Loosveldt Geert & Beullens Koen, 2017. "Interviewer Effects on Non-Differentiation and Straightlining in the European Social Survey," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(2), pages 409-426, June.
    21. Davide Giacomini & Anna Simonetto, 2020. "How Mayors Perceive the Influence of Social Media on the Policy Cycle," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 735-752, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0215898. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.