{"title":"Survey Design Moderates Negativity Bias but not Positivity Bias in Self-Reported Job Stress","authors":"Roman Pauli, Jessica Lang","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000806","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Self-report measures are both frequently used and criticized in studies of job-related stress. The question remains whether affective dispositions lead to biased assessments. In this study, we examine the extent to which survey characteristics are susceptible to bias by the characteristics of the person making the assessment. Participants ( N = 1,509) in an online split ballot experiment were randomly assigned to report their job stressors using a 2 (task vs. person-related items) × 2 (frequency vs. agreement response format) factorial design. Participants high in neuroticism or negative affectivity, but not positive affectivity, reported more job stressors when responding to person-related items compared to task-related items. Individuals high in neuroticism reported more job stressors when assessed with agreement compared to frequency response format. However, the response format did not alter the relationship between self-reported job stressors and positive or negative affectivity. Findings indicate how survey design can reinforce affectivity bias in the assessments of job stressors. If an assessment is intended to evaluate objective circumstances rather than subjective experiences at work (e.g., the presence of general risk factors within psychosocial risk assessment), it is recommended to employ condition-related questionnaires with task-related item wordings and frequency response formats.","PeriodicalId":48018,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000806","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Abstract: Self-report measures are both frequently used and criticized in studies of job-related stress. The question remains whether affective dispositions lead to biased assessments. In this study, we examine the extent to which survey characteristics are susceptible to bias by the characteristics of the person making the assessment. Participants ( N = 1,509) in an online split ballot experiment were randomly assigned to report their job stressors using a 2 (task vs. person-related items) × 2 (frequency vs. agreement response format) factorial design. Participants high in neuroticism or negative affectivity, but not positive affectivity, reported more job stressors when responding to person-related items compared to task-related items. Individuals high in neuroticism reported more job stressors when assessed with agreement compared to frequency response format. However, the response format did not alter the relationship between self-reported job stressors and positive or negative affectivity. Findings indicate how survey design can reinforce affectivity bias in the assessments of job stressors. If an assessment is intended to evaluate objective circumstances rather than subjective experiences at work (e.g., the presence of general risk factors within psychosocial risk assessment), it is recommended to employ condition-related questionnaires with task-related item wordings and frequency response formats.
期刊介绍:
The main purpose of the EJPA is to present important articles which provide seminal information on both theoretical and applied developments in this field. Articles reporting the construction of new measures or an advancement of an existing measure are given priority. The journal is directed to practitioners as well as to academicians: The conviction of its editors is that the discipline of psychological assessment should, necessarily and firmly, be attached to the roots of psychological science, while going deeply into all the consequences of its applied, practice-oriented development.