反应风格的测量与统计控制
|
摘要
反应风格是共同方法偏差的主要来源之一。本文首先讨论反应风格的定义和类型,梳理其危害,认为反应风格能使测验分数出现偏差,影响测验信效度分析和变量关系分析,有必要控制其危害。然后介绍了常用的反应风格测量方法,包括计数法和模型法两大类,对测量方法的选择给出了建议,在此基础上,就如何结合反应风格的测量方法与残差回归法、偏相关法来控制反应风格危害给出建议。
Response styles are one of the major sources of common method bias. They refer to the tendency to select specific categories of a rating scale. The most common types of response styles include acquiescence response style, disacquiescence response style, extreme response style and midpoint response style. They can cause subjects' response to rating scales biased, and thus, they may lead to systematic measurement errors in test scores and influence the results of the analyses of test reliability and validity, and the analysis of the covariation between constructs. It is hard to measure response styles directly with a psychological scale. Thus, researchers usually use the counting procedure or the modeling procedure to measure it. The counting procedure mainly includes the traditional counting procedure, the method of representative indicators for response styles,and the method of counting double agreements on reversed items. The modeling procedure mainly includes the method of specifying acquiescence response style in confirmatory factor analysis, confirmatory latent class analysis, the mixed partial credit model, the item response tree model and the multidimensional nominal response model. When selecting appropriate methods to measure response styles, researchers need to consider the following questions. Firstly, what types of response styles do they want to measure? Secondly, are response styles regarded as continuous or categorical variables?Thirdly, is the content-related trait regarded as a continuous or categorical variable? Fourthly, can researchers obtain a group of heterogeneous items?Fifthly, are there some pairs of items that examine similar content but are worded in opposite directions? Lastly, is the number of positively worded items equal to the number of negatively worded items? As for controlling the effects of response styles on data analysis, different procedures are appropriate in controlling different effects of response styles. In some cases, it requires researchers to combine the measuring procedures and the regression residual method or the partial correlation method to control the effects of response styles. Firstly, to control the bias that response styles cause in test scores, researchers can apply the modeling procedure or the combination of the counting procedure and the regression residual method.Secondly, to control the effects of response styles on the analyses of test reliability and validity, researchers can apply the combination of the modeling procedure and the regression residual method or the combination of the counting procedure and the regression residual method. With respect to the control of the effects of response styles on the measurement invariance test, researchers can apply the procedure of specifying acquiescence response style in confirmatory factor analysis, confirmatory latent class analysis or the multidimensional nominal response model. Thirdly, to control the effect of response styles on the analysis of the covariation between constructs, researchers can apply the modeling procedure, the combination of the counting procedure and the regression residual method or the combination of the counting procedure and the partial correlation method. Future research needs to extend the existing methods for measuring and controlling response styles, examine their validity, and systematically investigate the effects of response styles on data analysis.
Response styles are one of the major sources of common method bias. They refer to the tendency to select specific categories of a rating scale. The most common types of response styles include acquiescence response style, disacquiescence response style, extreme response style and midpoint response style. They can cause subjects' response to rating scales biased, and thus, they may lead to systematic measurement errors in test scores and influence the results of the analyses of test reliability and validity, and the analysis of the covariation between constructs. It is hard to measure response styles directly with a psychological scale. Thus, researchers usually use the counting procedure or the modeling procedure to measure it. The counting procedure mainly includes the traditional counting procedure, the method of representative indicators for response styles,and the method of counting double agreements on reversed items. The modeling procedure mainly includes the method of specifying acquiescence response style in confirmatory factor analysis, confirmatory latent class analysis, the mixed partial credit model, the item response tree model and the multidimensional nominal response model. When selecting appropriate methods to measure response styles, researchers need to consider the following questions. Firstly, what types of response styles do they want to measure? Secondly, are response styles regarded as continuous or categorical variables?Thirdly, is the content-related trait regarded as a continuous or categorical variable? Fourthly, can researchers obtain a group of heterogeneous items?Fifthly, are there some pairs of items that examine similar content but are worded in opposite directions? Lastly, is the number of positively worded items equal to the number of negatively worded items? As for controlling the effects of response styles on data analysis, different procedures are appropriate in controlling different effects of response styles. In some cases, it requires researchers to combine the measuring procedures and the regression residual method or the partial correlation method to control the effects of response styles. Firstly, to control the bias that response styles cause in test scores, researchers can apply the modeling procedure or the combination of the counting procedure and the regression residual method.Secondly, to control the effects of response styles on the analyses of test reliability and validity, researchers can apply the combination of the modeling procedure and the regression residual method or the combination of the counting procedure and the regression residual method. With respect to the control of the effects of response styles on the measurement invariance test, researchers can apply the procedure of specifying acquiescence response style in confirmatory factor analysis, confirmatory latent class analysis or the multidimensional nominal response model. Thirdly, to control the effect of response styles on the analysis of the covariation between constructs, researchers can apply the modeling procedure, the combination of the counting procedure and the regression residual method or the combination of the counting procedure and the partial correlation method. Future research needs to extend the existing methods for measuring and controlling response styles, examine their validity, and systematically investigate the effects of response styles on data analysis.
引文
郭庆科,王昭,韩丹,时勘.(2007).中国高中学生中的反应风格及其效应.心理学报,39(1),176-183.
余益兵,邹泓,曲可佳.(2008).中学生反应风格的特点及其在人格与自尊关系中的效应.中国临床心理学杂志,16(5),544-546.
周浩,龙立荣.(2004).共同方法偏差的统计检验与控制方法.心理科学进展,12(6),942-950.
Baumgartner,H.,&Steenkamp,J.E.B.M.(2001).Response styles in marketing research:A cross-national investigation.Journal of Marketing Research,38(2),143-156.
Billiet,J.B.,&Davidov,E.(2008).Testing the stability of an acquiescence style factor behind two interrelated substantive variables in a panel design.Sociological Methods and Research,36(4),542-562.
B?ckenholt,U.(2012).Modeling multiple response processes in judgment and choice.Psychological Methods,17(4),665-678.
B?ckenholt,U.(2017).Measuring response styles in Likert items.Psychological Methods,22(1),69-83.
B?ckenholt,U.,&Meiser,T.(2017).Response style analysis with threshold and multi-process IRT models:A review and tutorial.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology,70(1),159-181.
Bolt,D.M.,&Johnson,T.R.(2009).Addressing score bias and differential item functioning due to individual differences in response style.Applied Psychological Measurement,33(5),335-352.
De Beuckelaer,A.,Weijters,B.,&Rutten,A.(2010).Using ad hoc measures for response styles:A cautionary note.Quality and Quantity,44(4),761-775.
De Boeck,P.,&Partchev,I.(2012).IRTrees:Tree-based item response models of the GLMM family.Journal of Statistical Software,48(1),37-48.
Falk,C.F.,&Cai,L.(2016).A flexible full-information approach to the modeling of response styles.Psychological Methods,21(3),328-347.
Greenleaf,E.A.(1992).Measuring extreme response style.Public Opinion Quarterly,56(3),328-351.
Hoffmann,S.,Mai,R.,&Cristescu,A.(2013).Do culture-dependent response styles distort substantial relationships?International Business Review,22(5),814-827.
Johnson,T.,Kulesa,P.,Cho,Y.I.,&Shavitt,S.(2005).The relation between culture and response styles evidence from 19 countries.Journal of CrossCultural Psychology,36(2),264-277.
Kam,C.C.S.(2016).Further considerations in using items with diverse content to measure acquiescence.Educational and Psychological Measurement,76(1),164-174.
Kankara?,M.,&Moors,G.(2009).Measurement equivalence in solidarity attitudes in Europe.International Sociology,24(4),557-579.
Kieruj,N.D.,&Moors,G.(2013).Response style behavior:Question format dependent or personal style?Quality and Quantity,47(1),193-211.
Kutscher,T.,Crayen,C.,&Eid,M.(2017).Using a mixed IRT model to assess the scale usage in the measurement of job satisfaction.Frontiers in Psychology,7,1998.
Liu,M.,Harbaugh,A.G.,Harring,J.R.,&Hancock,G.R.(2017).The effect of extreme response and non-extreme response styles on testing measurement invariance.Frontiers in Psychology,8,726.
Moors,G.(2003).Diagnosing response style behavior by means of a latent-class factor approach.Socio-demographic correlates of gender role attitudes and perceptions of ethnic discrimination reexamined.Quality and Quantity,37(3),277-302.
Moors,G.(2012).The effect of response style bias on the measurement of transformational,transactional,and laissez-faire leadership.European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,21(2),271-298.
Moors,G.,Kieruj,N.D.,&Vermunt,J.K.(2014).The effect of labeling and numbering of response scales on the likelihood of response bias.Sociological Methodology,44(1),369-399.
Morren,M.,Gelissen,J.,&Vermunt,J.(2012).The impact of controlling for extreme responding on measurement equivalence in cross-cultural research.Methodology,8(4),159-170.
M?ttus,R.,Allik,J.,Realo,A.,Rossier,J.,Zecca,G.,Ah-Kion,J.,et al.(2012).The effect of response style on self-reported conscientiousness across 20countries.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,38(11),1423-1436.
Podsakoff,P.M.,Mackenzie,S.B.,&Podsakoff,N.P.(2012).Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it.Annual Review of Psychology,63(1),539-569.
Paulhus,D.L.(1991).Measurement and control of response bias.In J.P.Robinson,P.R.Shaver&L.S.Wrightsman(Eds.),Measures of social psychological attitudes.San Diego,CA:Academic Press.
Plieninger,H.(2016).Mountain or molehill?A simulation study on the impact of response styles.Educational and Psychological Measurement,77(1),32-53.
Plieninger,H.,&Meiser,T.(2014).Validity of multiprocess IRT models for separating content and response styles.Educational and Psychological Measurement,74(5),875-899.
Rammstedt,B.,Kemper,C.J.,&Borg,I.(2013).Correcting big five personality measurements for acquiescence:An 18-country cross-cultural study.European Journal of Personality,27(1),71-81.
Rost,J.,Carstensen,C.,von Davier,M.(1997).Applying the mixed Rasch model to personality questionnaires.In J.Rost&R.Langeheine(Eds.),Applications of latent trait and latent class models in the social sciences.Munster:Waxmann Verlag.
Van Vaerenbergh,Y.,&Thomas,T.D.(2013).Response styles in survey research:A literature review of antecedents,consequences,and remedies.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,25(2),195-217.
Watkins,D.,&Cheung,S.(1995).Culture,gender,and response bias:An analysis of responses to the self-description questionnaire.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,26(5),490-504.
Weijters,B.,Schillewaert,N.,&Geuens,M.(2008).Assessing response styles across modes of data collection.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,36(3),409-422.
Welkenhuysen-Gybels,J.,Billiet,J.,&Cambré,B.(2003).Adjustment for acquiescence in the assessment of the construct equivalence of Likert-type score items.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,34(6),702-722.
Wetzel,E.,&Carstensen,C.H.(2017).Multidimensional modeling of traits and response styles.European Journal of Psychological Assessment,33(5),352-364.
Wetzel,E.,B?hnke,J.,&Rose,N.(2016).A simulation study on methods of correcting for the effects of extreme response style.Educational and Psychological Measurement,76(2),304-324.
Wetzel,E.,Carstensen,C.H.,&B?hnke,J.R.(2013).Consistency of extreme response style and non-extreme response style across traits.Journal of Research in Personality,47(2),178-189.
Wetzel,E.,Lüdtke,O.,Zettler,I.,&B?hnke,J.R.(2016).The stability of extreme response style and acquiescence over 8 years.Assessment,23(3),279-291.
余益兵,邹泓,曲可佳.(2008).中学生反应风格的特点及其在人格与自尊关系中的效应.中国临床心理学杂志,16(5),544-546.
周浩,龙立荣.(2004).共同方法偏差的统计检验与控制方法.心理科学进展,12(6),942-950.
Baumgartner,H.,&Steenkamp,J.E.B.M.(2001).Response styles in marketing research:A cross-national investigation.Journal of Marketing Research,38(2),143-156.
Billiet,J.B.,&Davidov,E.(2008).Testing the stability of an acquiescence style factor behind two interrelated substantive variables in a panel design.Sociological Methods and Research,36(4),542-562.
B?ckenholt,U.(2012).Modeling multiple response processes in judgment and choice.Psychological Methods,17(4),665-678.
B?ckenholt,U.(2017).Measuring response styles in Likert items.Psychological Methods,22(1),69-83.
B?ckenholt,U.,&Meiser,T.(2017).Response style analysis with threshold and multi-process IRT models:A review and tutorial.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology,70(1),159-181.
Bolt,D.M.,&Johnson,T.R.(2009).Addressing score bias and differential item functioning due to individual differences in response style.Applied Psychological Measurement,33(5),335-352.
De Beuckelaer,A.,Weijters,B.,&Rutten,A.(2010).Using ad hoc measures for response styles:A cautionary note.Quality and Quantity,44(4),761-775.
De Boeck,P.,&Partchev,I.(2012).IRTrees:Tree-based item response models of the GLMM family.Journal of Statistical Software,48(1),37-48.
Falk,C.F.,&Cai,L.(2016).A flexible full-information approach to the modeling of response styles.Psychological Methods,21(3),328-347.
Greenleaf,E.A.(1992).Measuring extreme response style.Public Opinion Quarterly,56(3),328-351.
Hoffmann,S.,Mai,R.,&Cristescu,A.(2013).Do culture-dependent response styles distort substantial relationships?International Business Review,22(5),814-827.
Johnson,T.,Kulesa,P.,Cho,Y.I.,&Shavitt,S.(2005).The relation between culture and response styles evidence from 19 countries.Journal of CrossCultural Psychology,36(2),264-277.
Kam,C.C.S.(2016).Further considerations in using items with diverse content to measure acquiescence.Educational and Psychological Measurement,76(1),164-174.
Kankara?,M.,&Moors,G.(2009).Measurement equivalence in solidarity attitudes in Europe.International Sociology,24(4),557-579.
Kieruj,N.D.,&Moors,G.(2013).Response style behavior:Question format dependent or personal style?Quality and Quantity,47(1),193-211.
Kutscher,T.,Crayen,C.,&Eid,M.(2017).Using a mixed IRT model to assess the scale usage in the measurement of job satisfaction.Frontiers in Psychology,7,1998.
Liu,M.,Harbaugh,A.G.,Harring,J.R.,&Hancock,G.R.(2017).The effect of extreme response and non-extreme response styles on testing measurement invariance.Frontiers in Psychology,8,726.
Moors,G.(2003).Diagnosing response style behavior by means of a latent-class factor approach.Socio-demographic correlates of gender role attitudes and perceptions of ethnic discrimination reexamined.Quality and Quantity,37(3),277-302.
Moors,G.(2012).The effect of response style bias on the measurement of transformational,transactional,and laissez-faire leadership.European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,21(2),271-298.
Moors,G.,Kieruj,N.D.,&Vermunt,J.K.(2014).The effect of labeling and numbering of response scales on the likelihood of response bias.Sociological Methodology,44(1),369-399.
Morren,M.,Gelissen,J.,&Vermunt,J.(2012).The impact of controlling for extreme responding on measurement equivalence in cross-cultural research.Methodology,8(4),159-170.
M?ttus,R.,Allik,J.,Realo,A.,Rossier,J.,Zecca,G.,Ah-Kion,J.,et al.(2012).The effect of response style on self-reported conscientiousness across 20countries.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,38(11),1423-1436.
Podsakoff,P.M.,Mackenzie,S.B.,&Podsakoff,N.P.(2012).Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it.Annual Review of Psychology,63(1),539-569.
Paulhus,D.L.(1991).Measurement and control of response bias.In J.P.Robinson,P.R.Shaver&L.S.Wrightsman(Eds.),Measures of social psychological attitudes.San Diego,CA:Academic Press.
Plieninger,H.(2016).Mountain or molehill?A simulation study on the impact of response styles.Educational and Psychological Measurement,77(1),32-53.
Plieninger,H.,&Meiser,T.(2014).Validity of multiprocess IRT models for separating content and response styles.Educational and Psychological Measurement,74(5),875-899.
Rammstedt,B.,Kemper,C.J.,&Borg,I.(2013).Correcting big five personality measurements for acquiescence:An 18-country cross-cultural study.European Journal of Personality,27(1),71-81.
Rost,J.,Carstensen,C.,von Davier,M.(1997).Applying the mixed Rasch model to personality questionnaires.In J.Rost&R.Langeheine(Eds.),Applications of latent trait and latent class models in the social sciences.Munster:Waxmann Verlag.
Van Vaerenbergh,Y.,&Thomas,T.D.(2013).Response styles in survey research:A literature review of antecedents,consequences,and remedies.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,25(2),195-217.
Watkins,D.,&Cheung,S.(1995).Culture,gender,and response bias:An analysis of responses to the self-description questionnaire.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,26(5),490-504.
Weijters,B.,Schillewaert,N.,&Geuens,M.(2008).Assessing response styles across modes of data collection.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,36(3),409-422.
Welkenhuysen-Gybels,J.,Billiet,J.,&Cambré,B.(2003).Adjustment for acquiescence in the assessment of the construct equivalence of Likert-type score items.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,34(6),702-722.
Wetzel,E.,&Carstensen,C.H.(2017).Multidimensional modeling of traits and response styles.European Journal of Psychological Assessment,33(5),352-364.
Wetzel,E.,B?hnke,J.,&Rose,N.(2016).A simulation study on methods of correcting for the effects of extreme response style.Educational and Psychological Measurement,76(2),304-324.
Wetzel,E.,Carstensen,C.H.,&B?hnke,J.R.(2013).Consistency of extreme response style and non-extreme response style across traits.Journal of Research in Personality,47(2),178-189.
Wetzel,E.,Lüdtke,O.,Zettler,I.,&B?hnke,J.R.(2016).The stability of extreme response style and acquiescence over 8 years.Assessment,23(3),279-291.