CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 111Psychometric Methodologies and TestingEvaluation and Performance AssessmentRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Addressing Response-shift Bias: Retrospective Pretests in Recreation Research and Evaluation

Sibthorp, Jim, Paisley, Karen, Gookin, John, Ward, Peter·2007·Journal of Leisure Research
DOI 10.1080/00222216.2007.11950109
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The self-reported pretest/posttest has been commonly used to assess change in recreation research and evaluation efforts. The viability of comparing pre and post measures relies on the assumption that the scale of measurement, or metric, is the same before and after an intervention. With self-report measures, the metric resides within the study participants and, thus, can be directly affected by the intervention. If participants' levels of self-knowledge change as the result of a recreation program, then this metric may also shift, making comparisons between measures from before and after the program problematic. This article aims to both synthesize the theory and literature surrounding this problem and to offer a mixed-methods, data-based example, which illustrates the problem in a recreation context and posits possible reasons for differences in reported precourse attribute levels by reporting time. Results generally supported using a retrospective pretest as a way to address changing metrics with self-report measures. This article further discusses when and how it is appropriate to use retrospective pretests in recreation research and evaluation.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00222216.2007.11950109

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Christensen J., 1995, Research about leisure: Past, present, and future (2nd ed.), 231
  2. Green G., 2000, Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 18, 76
  3. Hurtes K. P., 2000, Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 18, 34

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 111

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Sibthorp, J., Paisley, K., Gookin, J., & Ward, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Utah (US)
  • The National Outdoor Leadership School
  • Brigham Young University (US)
Corresponding author
Sibthorp, Jim
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Leisure Research
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2007-06
Volume
39
Issue
2
Pages
295-315
ISSN
  • 0022-2216 (ISSN-L)
  • 2159-6417
DOI
10.1080/00222216.2007.11950109
OpenAlex
W1747140384
Cited by
111
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Leisure Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality Management › Recreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Keywords
response-shift bias, self-report measures, pre-post test comparison, measurement scales

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review