The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning
Open accessAbstract
Indirect (i.e., structured projective) questioning has been employed frequently in marketing and other social sciences to reduce social desirability bias, that is, systematic error in self-report measures resulting from the desire of respondents to avoid embarrassment and project a favorable image to others. Yet little is known about the validity of indirect questioning in reducing social desirability bias. This article reports on three studies that examine indirect questioning as a technique to reduce social desirability bias on self-report measures. The effects of asking indirect (i.e., structured, projective) questions were compared with direct (i.e., structured, personal) questions The pattern of results indicates that indirect questioning reduces social desirability bias on variables subject to social influence and has no significant effect on socially neutral variables. The social nature of the differences between direct and indirect questioning groups, and the attribution of an undesirable trait to an out-group but not an in-group target, supports the view that subjects projected their beliefs and evaluations in the indirect response situation. These results are consistent across several product categories and indirect question wordings.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Bergen, N., & Labonté, R. (2020) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/1049732319889354 · Cited by 1,558
A Survey of Fake News: Fundamental Theories, Detection Methods, and Opportunities
Zhou, X., & Zafarani, R. (2021) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3395046 · Cited by 1,184
Effort for Payment: A Tale of Two Markets
Heyman, J., & Ariely, D. (2004) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00757.x · Cited by 827
Intimate Exchanges: Using Computers to Elicit Self-Disclosure from Consumers
Moon, Y. (2000) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209566 · Cited by 842
The state of immersive technology research: A literature analysis
Suh, A., & Prophet, J. (2018) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.019 · Cited by 841
Metadata
- Authors
- Fisher, R. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1993-09
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 303
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W2010928525
- Cited by
- 2,789
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/209351
- The paper
- Fisher, R. J. (1993). Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1086/209351
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.