scholarly journals The effects of response bias in two-alternative-forced-choice discrimination matrices

1968 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
pp. 175-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. M. Holloway
Keyword(s):  
Response Bias ◽  
Forced Choice

scholarly journals Pre-print #3

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Samuel Schwarzkopf ◽  
Nonie J Finlayson ◽  
Benjamin de Haas
Keyword(s):  
Response Bias ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
Perceptual Bias ◽  
Confounding Factors ◽  
Decision Criteria ◽  
Response Modality ◽  
Multiple Alternative ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Response Biases ◽  
Perceptual Factors

Perceptual bias is inherent to all our senses, particularly in the form of visual illusionsand aftereffects. However, many experiments measuring perceptual biases may besusceptible to non-perceptual factors, such as response bias and decision criteria. Here wequantify how robust Multiple Alternative Perceptual Search (MAPS) is for disentanglingestimates of perceptual biases from these confounding factors. First our results show thatwhile there are considerable response biases in our four-alternative forced choice design,these are unrelated to perceptual biases estimates, and these response biases are notproduced by the response modality (keyboard versus mouse). We also show that perceptualbias estimates are reduced when feedback is given on each trial, likely due to feedbackenabling observers to partially (and actively) correct for perceptual biases. However, thisdoes not impact the reliability with which MAPS detects the presence of perceptual biases.Finally, our results show that MAPS can detect actual perceptual biases and is not adecisional bias towards choosing the target in the middle of the candidate stimulusdistribution. In summary, researchers conducting a MAPS experiment should use a constantreference stimulus, but consider varying the mean of the candidate distribution. Ideally,they should not employ trial-wise feedback if the magnitude of perceptual biases is ofinterest.

Self-Administered Field Surveys on Sensitive Topics

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Matthew Nanes ◽  
Dotan Haim
Keyword(s):  
Response Bias ◽  
Choice Experiment ◽  
Electronic Devices ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
Field Surveys ◽  
Sensitive Topics ◽  
Sensitive Question ◽  
Experimental Approaches ◽  
A Priority

Abstract Research on sensitive topics uses a variety of methods to combat response bias on in-person surveys. Increasingly, researchers allow respondents to self-administer responses using electronic devices as an alternative to more complicated experimental approaches. Using an experiment embedded in a survey in the rural Philippines, we test the effects of several such methods on response rates and falsification. We asked respondents a sensitive question about reporting insurgents to the police alongside a nonsensitive question about school completion. We randomly assigned respondents to answer these questions either verbally, through a “forced choice” experiment, or through self-enumeration. We find that self-enumeration significantly reduced nonresponse compared to direct questioning, but find little evidence of differential rates of falsification. Forced choice yielded highly unlikely estimates, which we attribute to nonstrategic falsification. These results suggest that self-administered surveys can be effective for measuring sensitive topics on surveys when response rates are a priority.

Validation of a detector of response bias on a forced-choice test of nonverbal ability.

1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard I. Frederick ◽  
Stephen D. Sarfaty ◽  
J. Dennis Johnston ◽  
Jeffrey Powel
Keyword(s):  
Response Bias ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
Choice Test ◽  
Nonverbal Ability

Correcting Two-Alternative Forced-Choice Data for Response Bias

1971 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 533-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl Auerbach
Keyword(s):  
Normal Distribution ◽  
Response Bias ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
Choice Data

A method for correcting two-alternative forced-choice data for response bias is presented which requires only a table of integrals of a normal distribution.

scholarly journals Assessing the Influence of Reversed Items and Force-Choice on the Work and Meaning Inventory [Evaluación de la influencia de los ítems invertidos y de elección forzosa en el Inventario de trabajo significativo]

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 103
Author(s):  
Maria da Glória Lima Leonardo ◽  
Michelle Morelo Pereira ◽  
Felipe Valentini ◽  
Clarissa Pinto Pizarro de Freitas ◽  
Michael F. Steger
Keyword(s):  
Response Bias ◽  
Choice Model ◽  
Organizational Psychology ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Meaning Of Work ◽  
Positive Organizational Psychology ◽  
Latent Dimension

AbstractResponse biases are issues in inventories in positive organizational psychology. The study aims to control the response bias in the assessment of meaning of work through two methods: reversed key items and forced-choice format. The sample consisted of 351 professionals; women constituted 60.0 % of the sample. The participants answered two versions of the instrument for meaning of work: Likert-type items and forced-choice. For both versions, the unifactorial model was the most appropriate for the data available. The results indicate that the random intercepts model fit the Likert data (CFI = .92), as well as the forced-choice model (CFI = .97). Besides, the latent dimension of the forced-choice version did not correlate with acquiescence index (r < .08; p > .05), and approximately 20 % of the variance of the items might be due to the method (Likert or forced-choice). The present study illustrates the importance of response bias control in self-report instruments. ResumenLos sesgos de respuesta son problemas en los inventarios de la psicología organizacional positiva. El estudio tiene como objetivo controlar el sesgo de respuesta en la eva­luación del trabajo significativo a través de dos métodos: ítems clave invertidos y formato de elección forzosa. La muestra estuvo formada por 351 profesionales; las muje­res constituyeron el 60.0 % de la muestra. Los participan­tes respondieron dos versiones del instrumento de signifi­cado del trabajo: ítems tipo Likert y elección forzosa. Para ambas versiones, el modelo unifactorial fue el más apro­piado para los datos disponibles. Los resultados indican que el modelo de intersecciones aleatorias se ajusta a los datos Likert (CFI = .92), así como al modelo de elección forzada (CFI = .97). Además, la dimensión latente de la versión de elección forzada no se correlacionó con el ín­dice de aquiescencia (r < .08; p > .05), y aproximada­mente el 20 % de la varianza de los ítems podría deberse al método (Likert o forzado). elección). El presente estu­dio ilustra la importancia del control del sesgo de res­puesta en los instrumentos de autoinforme.

Signal Detection Analysis of Visual Flicker in Deaf and Hearing Individuals

1980 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 839-843 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Bross ◽  
Hannelore Sauerwein
Keyword(s):  
Signal Detection ◽  
Response Bias ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
Resolving Power ◽  
Stimulus Probability ◽  
Sensory Sensitivity ◽  
Detection Analysis ◽  
Signal Detection Analysis ◽  
Flicker Task ◽  
Sensory Compensation

A comparison of deaf and hearing subjects on temporal visual resolving power was conducted within a signal-detection paradigm. Subjects were required to make forced-choice judgments of a visual-flicker task under three stimulus probability conditions (0.25, 0.50, and 0.75). A total of 600 trials were given each subject from which d′ and Beta, indices for sensory sensitivity and response bias respectively, were computed. No significant differences existed on sensory sensitivity or response bias which questions some traditional assumptions about sensory compensation.

Authoritarian Scales as Criteria of Conformity

1969 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 776-778 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham M. Vaughan
Keyword(s):  
Response Bias ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
Item Content

The F scale discriminated more efficiently than the D scale or a forced-choice F scale between consistent-high and consistent-low conformers. This suggests the operation of acquiescent response bias and a congruence between range of item content and some characteristics of the population sampled.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document