CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 422Survey Methodology and NonresponseSurvey Sampling and Estimation TechniquesMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 161 of the 161 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Disclosure of sensitive behaviors across self-administered survey modes: a meta-analysis

Open access
Gnambs, Timo, Kaspar, Kai·2015·Behavior Research Methods
DOI 10.3758/s13428-014-0533-4
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In surveys, individuals tend to misreport behaviors that are in contrast to prevalent social norms or regulations. Several design features of the survey procedure have been suggested to counteract this problem; particularly, computerized surveys are supposed to elicit more truthful responding. This assumption was tested in a meta-analysis of survey experiments reporting 460 effect sizes (total N =125,672). Self-reported prevalence rates of several sensitive behaviors for which motivated misreporting has been frequently observed were compared across self-administered paper-and-pencil versus computerized surveys. The results revealed that computerized surveys led to significantly more reporting of socially undesirable behaviors than comparable surveys administered on paper. This effect was strongest for highly sensitive behaviors and surveys administered individually to respondents. Moderator analyses did not identify interviewer effects or benefits of audio-enhanced computer surveys. The meta-analysis highlighted the advantages of computerized survey modes for the assessment of sensitive topics.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/s13428-014-0533-4

Cites

161 of 161 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Cites

Show all 159 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Beatty, P., & Herrmann, D. (2002). To answer or not to answer: Decision processes related to survey item nonresponse. In R. M. Groves, D. A. Dillman, J. L. Eltinge, & R. J. A. Little (Eds.), Survey Nonresponse (pp. 71–86). New York, NY: Wiley.
  2. *Chromy, J., Davis, T., Packer, L., & Gfroerer, J. (2002). Mode effects on substance use measures: Comparison of 1999 CAI and PAPI data. In J. Gfroerer, J. Eyerman, & J. Chromy (Eds.), Redesigning an ongoing national household survey: Methodological Issues (pp. 135–160). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies.
  3. Gnambs, T., Batinic, B., & Hertel, G. (2011). Internetbasierte psychologische Diagnostik [Web-based psychological assessment]. In L. F. Hornke, M. Amelang, & M. Kersting (Eds.), Verfahren zur Leistungs-, Intelligenz- und Verhaltensdiagnostik, Enzyklopädie der Psychologie, Psychologische Diagnostik (Vol. II/3, pp. 448-498). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.
  4. Stiglbauer, B., Gnambs, T., & Gamsjäger, M. (2011). The interactive effects of motivations and trust in anonymity on adolescents’ enduring participation in web-based social science research: A longitudinal behavioral analysis. International Journal of Internet Science, 6, 29–43.
  5. Tourangeau, R., Rasinski, K., Jobe, J., Smith, T. W., & Pratt, W. (1997). Sources of error in a survey of sexual behavior. Journal of Official Statistics, 13, 341–365.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 422

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Gnambs, T., & Kaspar, K.
Affiliations
  • Osnabrück University (DE)
  • University of Cologne (DE)
Corresponding author
Gnambs, Timo
ORCID
Venue
Behavior Research Methods
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2014-11-20
Volume
47
Issue
4
Pages
1237-1259
ISSN
  • 1554-351X (ISSN-L)
  • 1554-3528
DOI
10.3758/s13428-014-0533-4
OpenAlex
W1969579869
Cited by
422
References
159
Citations by year
2026: 47 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 1
FWCI
4.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Behavior Research Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Kölner Universitäts PublikationsServer (Universität zu Köln) (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA-01411, R01DA001411)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Mobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Keywords
sensitive behavior, paper-and-pencil surveys, survey mode effects, self-reported prevalence
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Computers, Humans, Motivation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Behavior, Reproducibility of Results, Effect Modifier, Epidemiologic, Disclosure

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