The identification of random or careless responding in questionnaires: The example of the NEO-FFI

Krzysztof Fronczyk

Abstract


The article presents two little-known indices of random or careless responding: Cattell’s sabotage index and fixed individualized chance (FIC) score. Both indices are used to identify people who provide content-irrelevant answers, such as random ones, in multidimensional questionnaires. The aim of the study was to verify empirically the diagnostic applications of these indices in distinguishing the actual NEO-FFI scores from random data generated by a computer. The study involved 943 participants and 1000 randomly generated protocols. Based on both indices in combination and using logistic regression, it proved possible to distinguish the actual data from the random data fairly well. Approximately 86% of all data was classified correctly. This result is quite high, given that some participants might have responded to the NEO-FFI items in a random way.


Keywords


random responding; careless responding; Cattell’s sabotage index; FIC index; NEO-FFI

Full Text:

PDF

References


Archer, R. P. i Elkins, D. E. (1999). Identification of random responding on the MMPI-A. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73, 407-421.

Baer, R. A., Ballenger, J., Berry, D. T. R. i Wetter, M. W. (1997). Detection of random responding on the MMPI-A. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 139-151.

Baer, R. A., Kroll, L. S., Rinaldo, J. i Ballenger, J. (1999). Detecting and discriminating between random responding and overreporting on the MMPI-A. Journal of Personality Assessment, 72, 308-320.

Beach, D. A. (1989). Identifying the random responder. The Journal of Psychology, 123, 101-103.

Cattell, R. B., Eber, H. W. i Tatsuoka, M. M. (1970). Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF). Champaign, IL: IPAT.

Ćwik, J. i Mielniczuk, J. (2009). Statystyczne systemy uczące się. Ćwiczenia w oparciu o pakiet R. Warszawa: Oficyna Wydawnicza PW.

Evans, R. G. i Dinning, W. D. (1983). Response consistency among high F scale scorers on the MMPI. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 39, 246-248.

Fong, D. Y. T., Ho, S. Y. i Lam, T. H. (2010). Evaluation of internal reliability in the presence of inconsistent responses. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 8, 27.

Haertzen, C. A. i Ross, F. E. (1978). Using four chance profiles to estimate carelessness. Psychological Reports, 41, 1079-1087.

Irvine, M. J. i Gendreau, P. (1974). Detection of the fake ‘good’ and ‘bad’ response on the sixteen personality factor inventory in prisoners and college students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 465-466.

Karabatsos, G. (2003). Comparing the aberrant response detection performance of thirty-six person-fit statistics. Applied Measurement in Education, 16, 277-298.

Kądalska, E. i Fronczyk, K. (2006). Motywy wyboru studiów licencjackich na kierunku pielęgniarstwo w Polsce. Pielęgniarstwo XXI wieku, 1-2, 111-115.

Krysicki, W., Bartos, J., Dyczka, W., Królikowska, K. i Wasilewski, M. (2007). Rachunek prawdopodobieństwa i statystyka matematyczna w zadaniach. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Nichols, D. S. i Greene, R. L. (1997). Dimensions of deception in personality assessment: The example of the MMPI-2. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 251-266.

Nichols, D., Greene R. i Schmolck, P. (1989). Criteria for assessing inconsistent patterns of item endorsement on the MMPI: Rationale, development, and empirical trials. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45, 239-250.

O’Dell, J. W. (1971). Method for detecting random answers on personality questionnaires. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55, 380-383.

Paluchowski, W. J. (1983). Źródła zakłóceń w kwestionariuszowym badaniu osobowości i ich kontrola W: W. J. Paluchowski (red.), Z zagadnień diagnostyki osobowości (s. 249-271). Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.

Pinsoneault, T. B. (2002). A variable response inconsistency scale and a true response inconsistency scale for the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 14, 320-330.

Pinsoneault, T. B. (2005). Detecting random, partially random, and nonrandom Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent protocols. Psychological Assessment, 17, 476-480.

Ross, F. E. i Haertzen, C. A. (1979). The use of chance profiles for detecting carelessness: The effect of determining the true response rate from items in scales. Journal of Psychology, 101, 27-35.

Van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (1984). Answers without questions: A note on response style in questionnaires. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 59, 827-831.

Zawadzki, B. (2006). Kwestionariusze osobowości: strategie i procedura konstruowania. Warszawa: Scholar.

Zawadzki, B., Strelau, J., Szczepaniak, P. i Śliwinska, M. (1998). Inwentarz Osobowości NEO-FFI Costy i McCrae. Adaptacja polska. Podręcznik. Warszawa: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych PTP.

Zieliński, A. (2008). Błąd klasyfikacji w badaniach epidemiologicznych. Przegląd Epidemiologiczny, 62(2), 461-470.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Roczniki Psychologiczne/Annals of Psychology

ISSN: 1507-7888   e-ISSN: 2451-4306


© Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL & Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II – Wydział Nauk Społecznych


Articles are licensed under a Creative Commons  Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)