
In the recent methodological literature, various models have been proposed to account for the phenomenon that reversed items (defined as items for which respondents' scores have to be recoded in order to make the direction of keying consistent across all items) tend to lead to problematic responses. In this article we propose an integrative conceptualization of three important sources of reversed item method bias (acquiescence, careless responding, and confirmation bias) and specify a multisample confirmatory factor analysis model with 2 method factors to empirically test the hypothesized mechanisms, using explicit measures of acquiescence and carelessness and experimentally manipulated versions of a questionnaire that varies 3 item arrangements and the keying direction of the first item measuring the focal construct. We explain the mechanisms, review prior attempts to model reversed item bias, present our new model, and apply it to responses to a 4-item self-esteem scale (N = 306) and the 6-item Revised Life Orientation Test (N = 595). Based on the literature review and the empirical results, we formulate recommendations on how to use reversed items in questionnaires.
LIFE ORIENTATION TEST, STRATEGIES, Psychometrics, SELF-ESTEEM, Social Sciences, Models, Psychological, LIKERT, structural equation modeling, method effects, Bias, survey research, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, response styles, CONFIRMATORY FACTOR-ANALYSIS, Models, Statistical, MISRESPONSE, ACQUIESCENCE, OPTIMISM, reverse-keyed items, SCALES, Factor Analysis, Statistical, RESPONSE STYLES
LIFE ORIENTATION TEST, STRATEGIES, Psychometrics, SELF-ESTEEM, Social Sciences, Models, Psychological, LIKERT, structural equation modeling, method effects, Bias, survey research, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, response styles, CONFIRMATORY FACTOR-ANALYSIS, Models, Statistical, MISRESPONSE, ACQUIESCENCE, OPTIMISM, reverse-keyed items, SCALES, Factor Analysis, Statistical, RESPONSE STYLES
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 268 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
