Viés de desejabilidade social na pesquisa qualitativa em saúde
Open accessAbstract
Ensaio com o objetivo de discutir o viés de desejabilidade social na pesquisa qualitativa em saúde. O viés de desejabilidade social consiste em um erro sistemático de pesquisa, no qual o participante apresenta respostas que são mais socialmente aceitáveis do que suas opiniões ou comportamentos verdadeiros. Estudos qualitativos são muito suscetíveis a esse tipo de viés, que pode levar a conclusões distorcidas sobre o fenômeno em estudo. Inicialmente, apresento os aspectos teórico-conceituais do viés de desejabilidade social. Discuto como sua ocorrência pode ser intencional ou não intencional, com diferenciação entre os conceitos de autoengano e gerenciamento de impressão. Em seguida, discuto os fatores determinantes desse viés a partir de quatro dimensões: desenho do estudo; contexto do estudo; característica do entrevistado; postura do entrevistador. Por fim, apresento uma sistematização de seis estratégias a serem utilizadas por pesquisadores qualitativos para a identificação e controle do viés de desejabilidade social.
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
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.
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?
These studies may be subject to social desirability bias.
“These studies may be subject to social desirability bias (Bispo 2022).”
From Health-Promoting Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review of Structural Interventions to Protect Student Mental Health (2024) · cites this paper as Bispo 2022
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Information bias in health research: definition, pitfalls, and adjustment methods
Althubaiti, A. (2016) · Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare · doi:10.2147/jmdh.s104807 · Cited by 3,018 · see citing works
Two-component models of socially desirable responding.
Paulhus, D. L. (1984) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.3.598 · Cited by 3,013 · see citing works
Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry
Morse, J. M. (2015) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/1049732315588501 · Cited by 2,809 · see citing works
Methods of coping with social desirability bias: A review
Nederhof, A. J. (1985) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420150303 · Cited by 2,340 · see citing works
Bergen, N., & Labonté, R. (2020) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/1049732319889354 · Cited by 1,558 · see citing works
Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982) · ECTJ · doi:10.1007/bf02765185 · Cited by 1,186 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- [1]Norris N Error, bias and validity in qualitative research Educ Action Res 1997 5 1 172 176 10.1080/09650799700200020 · DOI
- [3]Galdas P Revisiting bias in qualitative research: reflections on its relationship with funding and impact Int J Qual Methods 2017 16 1 160940691774899. 10.1177/1609406917748992 · DOI · Paper page
- [4]Gerhard T Bias: considerations for research practice Am J Health Syst Pharm 2008 65 22 2159 2168 10.2146/ajhp070369 18997149 · DOI
- [6]Roulston K Shelton SA Reconceptualizing bias in teaching qualitative research methods Qual Inq 2015 21 4 332 342 10.1177/1077800414563803 · DOI
- [9]Trad LAB Trabalho de campo, narrativa e produção de conhecimento na pesquisa etnográfica contemporânea: subsídios ao campo da saúde Cienc Saude Colet 2012 17 3 627 633 10.1590/S1413-81232012000300008 22450403 · DOI
- [10]Morse JM Barrett M Mayan M Olson K Spiers J Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research Int J Qual Methods 2002 1 2 13 22 10.1177/160940690200100202 · DOI · Paper page
- [11]Ezzy D Are qualitative methods misunderstood? Aust N Z J Public Health 2001 25 4 294 297 10.1111/j.1467-842x.2001.tb00582.x 11529607 · DOI
- [12]Graeff TR Response bias Kempf-Leonard K Encyclopedia of social measurement San Diego, CA Academic Press 2005 411 418
- [14]Kühne S From strangers to acquaintances? Interviewer continuity and socially desirable responses in panel surveys Surv Res Methods 2018 12 2 121 146 10.18148/srm/2018.v12i2.7299 · DOI
- [17]Krumpal I Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review Qual Quant 2013 47 4 2025 2047 10.1007/s11135-011-9640-9 · DOI · Paper page
- [20]Trad LAB Grupos focais: conceitos, procedimentos e reflexões baseadas em experiências com o uso da técnica em pesquisas de saúde Physis 2009 19 3 777 796 10.1590/S0103-73312009000300013 · DOI
- [23]Onwuegbuzie AJ Leech NL Sampling designs in qualitative research: making the sampling process more public Qual Rep 2007 12 2 238 254 10.46743/2160-3715/2007.1636 · DOI
- [24]Grimm P Social desirability bias Sheth JN Malhotra NK Wiley International Encyclopedia of Marketing John Wiley 2010 10.1002/9781444316568.wiem02057 · DOI
- [25]Gomes MHA Silveira C Sobre o uso de métodos qualitativos em Saúde Coletiva, ou a falta que faz uma teoria Rev Saude Publica 2012 46 1 160 165 10.1590/s0034-89102012000100020 22249757 · DOI
- [26]Campos RTO Furtado JP Narrativas: utilização na pesquisa qualitativa em saúde Rev Saude Publica 2008 42 6 1090 1096 10.1590/s0034-89102008005000052 18820761 · DOI
- [27]Scott K Ummer O LeFevre AE The devil is in the detail: reflections on the value and application of cognitive interviewing to strengthen quantitative surveys in global health Health Policy Plan 2021 36 6 982 995 10.1093/heapol/czab048 33978729 PMC8227989 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cole, R. (2024) · Journal of Economic Criminology · doi:10.1016/j.jeconc.2024.100108 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Olsson, T. M., Broberg, M., Frisk, S., Wackenhut, A. F., Kjellin, D., Gullstrand, S., Rost, S., & Skoog, T. (2024) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.12772 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
- Authors
- Bispo Júnior, J. P.
- Affiliations
- Universidade Federal da Bahia. Instituto Multidisciplinar em Saúde. Vitória da Conquista, BA, Brasil
- Venue
- Revista de Saúde Pública
- Published
- 2022-11-18
- Volume
- 56
- Pages
- 101
- ISSN
- 0034-8910 (ISSN-L)
- 1518-8787
- PMC
- PMC9749714
- OpenAlex
- W4310689651
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 102 · 2025: 96 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 16
- FWCI
- 60.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- pt
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Revista de Saúde Pública (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
- Keywords
- social desirability bias, qualitative health research, self-deception, impression management, interviewer effects, interview context
- MeSH terms
- Brazil, Humans, Social Desirability, Bias, Qualitative Research
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
