Cited by 488Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesSurvey Methodology and NonresponsePsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Verbal report methods in clinical research on alcoholism: response bias and its minimization.

Babor, T F, Stephens, R S, Marlatt, G A·1987·Journal of Studies on Alcohol

Abstract

Verbal report procedures, such as interviews, tests and questionnaires, have become the dominant method to obtain clinical data on alcohol abuse and its modification through treatment. The extent to which this method provides reliable and valid information for research purposes, and how its accuracy and usefulness can be enhanced, is examined. A review of methodological studies in the alcohol literature shows that although the information obtained from alcoholics and heavy drinkers tends to be reliable and valid, there can be considerable variability in accuracy, depending on the sensitivity of the information sought, the specificity of the validation criteria, the personal characteristics of the respondents and the demand characteristics of the task. It is suggested that the question of whether verbal report procedures are valid or invalid is less important than the issue of how they can be improved to the point that confidence can be placed in their findings. To facilitate this process, methodological techniques likely to enhance validity are reviewed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.15288/jsa.1987.48.410

Cites

0 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
Babor, T. F., Stephens, R. S., & Marlatt, G. A.
Affiliations
University of Connecticut (US)
Venue
Journal of Studies on Alcohol
Published
1987-09
Volume
48
Issue
5
Pages
410-424
ISSN
  • 0096-882X (ISSN-L)
  • 1934-2683
OpenAlex
W2145120856
Cited by
488
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 10
FWCI
11.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Studies on Alcohol (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (AA 06558-02, 5P50 AA03510-09)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
alcoholism, response bias, validity, reliability statistics, heavy drinkers, demand characteristics, self-report questionnaire, interview validity, alcohol treatment outcomes
MeSH terms
Alcoholism, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Personality Tests, Surveys and Questionnaires, 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