SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Deutsch 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Einloggen
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • Über SSOAR
  • Leitlinien
  • Veröffentlichen auf SSOAR
  • Kooperieren mit SSOAR
    • Kooperationsmodelle
    • Ablieferungswege und Formate
    • Projekte
  • Kooperationspartner
    • Informationen zu Kooperationspartnern
  • Informationen
    • Möglichkeiten für den Grünen Weg
    • Vergabe von Nutzungslizenzen
    • Informationsmaterial zum Download
  • Betriebskonzept
Browsen und suchen Dokument hinzufügen OAI-PMH-Schnittstelle
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Volltext herunterladen

(externe Quelle)

Zitationshinweis

Bitte beziehen Sie sich beim Zitieren dieses Dokumentes immer auf folgenden Persistent Identifier (PID):
https://doi.org/10.13094/SMIF-2017-00002

Export für Ihre Literaturverwaltung

Bibtex-Export
Endnote-Export

Statistiken anzeigen
Weiterempfehlen
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

Comparing Continuous and Dichotomous Scoring of Social Desirability Scales: Effects of Different Scoring Methods on the Reliability and Validity of the Winkler-Kroh-Spiess BIDR Short Scale

[Zeitschriftenartikel]

Schnapp, Patrick
Eggert, Simon
Suhr, Ralf

Abstract

Survey researchers often include measures of social desirability in questionnaires. The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR; Paulhus, 1991) is a widely used instrument that measures two components of socially desirable responding: self-deceptive enhancement (SDE) and impression manageme... mehr

Survey researchers often include measures of social desirability in questionnaires. The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR; Paulhus, 1991) is a widely used instrument that measures two components of socially desirable responding: self-deceptive enhancement (SDE) and impression management (IM). An open question is whether these scales should be scored dichotomously (counting only extreme values) or continuously (taking the mean of the answers). This paper compares the two methods with respect to test-retest reliability (stability) and internal consistency using a short German version of the BIDR (Winkler, Kroh, & Spiess, 2006). Tests of criterion validity are also presented. Data are taken from a post-stratified national probability sample of German family doctors (n = 166). All retest reliabilities exceed .70. No significant differences in test-retest reliability are found for the SDE subscale and the combined scale; the IM subscale attains significantly higher test-retest reliability when scored continuously. Internal consistency is significantly higher for the continuously scored scales in one of two Waves. Tests of criterion validity yield expected results. Overall, these results suggest that the short German scale is a valid measure of socially desirable responding and support the case for continuous rather than dichotomous scoring of BIDR scales.... weniger

Thesaurusschlagwörter
soziale Erwünschtheit; Umfrageforschung; Validität; Skalenkonstruktion; Messung; Gewichtung; Reliabilität; Methodenvergleich; Bundesrepublik Deutschland; Hausarzt; Befragung; Selbsteinschätzung; Test; Bewertung

Klassifikation
Erhebungstechniken und Analysetechniken der Sozialwissenschaften

Freie Schlagwörter
Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding; BIDR; impression management; self-deceptive enhancement; social desirability; socially desirable responding; test-retest reliability

Sprache Dokument
Englisch

Publikationsjahr
2017

Seitenangabe
13 S.

Zeitschriftentitel
Survey Methods: Insights from the Field (2017)

ISSN
2296-4754

Status
Veröffentlichungsversion; begutachtet (peer reviewed)

Lizenz
Creative Commons - Namensnennung 4.0


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Impressum  |  Betriebskonzept  |  Datenschutzerklärung
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Impressum  |  Betriebskonzept  |  Datenschutzerklärung
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.