Cited by 124Public Policy and Administration ResearchSurvey Methodology and NonresponsePsychometric Methodologies and Testing

National Culture and Social Desirability Bias in Measuring Public Service Motivation

Kim, Seung Hyun, Kim, Sangmook·2016·Administration & Society

Abstract

Much of what we know about public service motivation comes from self-report measures. However, self-report questionnaires are vulnerable to social desirability bias due to respondents’ tendencies to answer in a more socially acceptable way. This is a problem as social desirability bias threatens the validity of the measure. This study investigates whether characteristics of national culture influence social desirability bias during surveys on public service motivation. In particular, the impact of social desirability bias is analyzed with two concerns in mind: construct validity and inference validity of public service motivation measures. Experimental survey research (list experiment) is conducted to examine the magnitude of social desirability bias and its associations with national cultures in four countries: Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, and the United States. The results show that respondents in both collectivistic countries (Japan and Korea) and individualistic countries (the Netherlands and the United States) are likely to over-report answers on items of public service motivation, although the magnitude and pattern of this bias is stronger and more consistent in collectivistic countries. This study also finds a strong possibility of a moderator effect in correlational analyses in collectivistic countries, but it is doubtful this effect is present in individualistic countries. Overall, we suggest that the effects of social desirability bias should be investigated in public service motivation research, and social desirability bias should be controlled for in future research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0095399713498749

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kim, S. H., & Kim, S.
Affiliations
Seoul National University of Science and Technology (KR)
Corresponding author
Kim, Seung Hyun
Venue
Administration & Society
Published
2013-09-04
Volume
48
Issue
4
Pages
444-476
ISSN
  • 0095-3997 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3039
OpenAlex
W2334083765
Cited by
124
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3
FWCI
12.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Administration & Society (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Sussex
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
public service motivation, social desirability bias, national culture, collectivism, individualism, list experiment, self-report measures, construct validity, validity of inference, overreporting, cross-national comparison

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