TY - JOUR

T1 - Careless responding detection revisited

T2 - Accuracy of direct and indirect measures

AU - Goldammer, Philippe

AU - Stöckli, Peter Lucas

AU - Escher, Yannik Andrea

AU - Annen, Hubert

AU - Jonas, Klaus

AU - Antonakis, John

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2024.

PY - 2024/12

Y1 - 2024/12

N2 - To screen for careless responding, researchers have a choice between several direct measures (i.e., bogus items, requiring the respondent to choose a specific answer) and indirect measures (i.e., unobtrusive post hoc indices). Given the dearth of research in the area, we examined how well direct and indirect indices perform relative to each other. In five experimental studies, we investigated whether the detection rates of the measures are affected by contextual factors: severity of the careless response pattern, type of item keying, and type of item presentation. We fully controlled the information environment by experimentally inducing careless response sets under a variety of contextual conditions. In Studies 1 and 2, participants rated the personality of an actor that presented himself in a 5-min-long videotaped speech. In Studies 3, 4, and 5, participants had to rate their own personality across two measurements. With the exception of maximum longstring, intra-individual response variability, and individual contribution to model misfit, all examined indirect indices performed better than chance in most of the examined conditions. Moreover, indirect indices had detection rates as good as and, in many cases, better than the detection rates of direct measures. We therefore encourage researchers to use indirect indices, especially within-person consistency indices, instead of direct measures.

AB - To screen for careless responding, researchers have a choice between several direct measures (i.e., bogus items, requiring the respondent to choose a specific answer) and indirect measures (i.e., unobtrusive post hoc indices). Given the dearth of research in the area, we examined how well direct and indirect indices perform relative to each other. In five experimental studies, we investigated whether the detection rates of the measures are affected by contextual factors: severity of the careless response pattern, type of item keying, and type of item presentation. We fully controlled the information environment by experimentally inducing careless response sets under a variety of contextual conditions. In Studies 1 and 2, participants rated the personality of an actor that presented himself in a 5-min-long videotaped speech. In Studies 3, 4, and 5, participants had to rate their own personality across two measurements. With the exception of maximum longstring, intra-individual response variability, and individual contribution to model misfit, all examined indirect indices performed better than chance in most of the examined conditions. Moreover, indirect indices had detection rates as good as and, in many cases, better than the detection rates of direct measures. We therefore encourage researchers to use indirect indices, especially within-person consistency indices, instead of direct measures.

KW - Bogus items

KW - Careless responding

KW - Careless responding detection

KW - Indirect methods

KW - Infrequency items

KW - Business psychology

KW - Psychology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85201313915&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/6da4b518-c696-3303-ae97-95ae4fd1795a/

U2 - 10.3758/s13428-024-02484-3

DO - 10.3758/s13428-024-02484-3

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 39147948

AN - SCOPUS:85201313915

VL - 56

SP - 8422

EP - 8449

JO - Behavior Research Methods

JF - Behavior Research Methods

SN - 1554-351X

IS - 8

ER -