Magdalena Holter, Alexander Avian, Martin Weger, Sanja Strini, Monja Michelitsch, Victoria Winkler, Agnes M Kloft, Julia Groß, Thomas Falb, Maximilian Gabriel, Manuel Großpötzl, Andreas Wedrich, Andrea Berghold
{"title":"Uncovering potential interviewer-related biases in self-efficacy assessment: a study among chronic disease patients.","authors":"Magdalena Holter, Alexander Avian, Martin Weger, Sanja Strini, Monja Michelitsch, Victoria Winkler, Agnes M Kloft, Julia Groß, Thomas Falb, Maximilian Gabriel, Manuel Großpötzl, Andreas Wedrich, Andrea Berghold","doi":"10.1186/s40359-025-02579-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Self-efficacy refers to an individual's belief in their ability to accomplish specific tasks and achieve goals, and plays an essential role in achieving positive outcomes in a wide range of domains. Central to the measurement of any form of self-efficacy is the assessment without bias, also in case of an interview situation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Outpatients with macular edema, an eye disease, participated in this questionnaire-based cross-sectional study. The study assessed self-efficacy using the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) in German. Interviewers read questionnaires aloud to patients. Differential item functioning (DIF) was investigated using likelihood-ratio χ2 tests for interviewer, sex, age, education, working status, income, diagnosis, and health-status.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included N = 556 patients. Median age was 68.4 (IQR: 62.0 - 76.0) years and mean overall GSE score 32.8 (SD: 4.81). No DIF was detected for interviewer. However, DIF was found in item 1 for education (uniform DIF, NCDIF<sub>no degree vs. degree</sub> = 0.042; easier with degree vs. none), in item 1 and 3 for income (item 1: non-uniform DIF, NCDIF<sub><€ 1,125 vs.≥€ 1,125≤€ 1,950</sub> = 0.050 / NCDIF<sub>< € 1,125 vs.≥€ 1,950</sub> = 0.099; item 3: uniform DIF, NCDIF<sub><€ 1,125 vs.≥€ 1,125-≤€ 1,950</sub> = 0.024 / NCDIF<sub>< € 1,125 vs.≥€ 1,950</sub>: 0.095; both easier with higher income), in item 2 for working status (uniform DIF, NCDIF<sub>retired vs. other</sub> = 0.017; easier if working) and in item 3 for sex (non-uniform DIF, NCDIF<sub>male vs. female</sub> = 0.043; easier for women in low ability, harder for them from medium ability on).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Given that no DIF was detected concerning interviewers, our findings indicate that an objective assessment of self-efficacy in a face-to-face interview may be feasible, provided that interviewers receive appropriate training. Since DIF effects concerning other patients characteristics found were small, the GSE may provide a relatively bias free way to assess self-efficacy in an interview setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":37867,"journal":{"name":"BMC Psychology","volume":"13 1","pages":"299"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11934557/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-02579-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Self-efficacy refers to an individual's belief in their ability to accomplish specific tasks and achieve goals, and plays an essential role in achieving positive outcomes in a wide range of domains. Central to the measurement of any form of self-efficacy is the assessment without bias, also in case of an interview situation.
Methods: Outpatients with macular edema, an eye disease, participated in this questionnaire-based cross-sectional study. The study assessed self-efficacy using the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) in German. Interviewers read questionnaires aloud to patients. Differential item functioning (DIF) was investigated using likelihood-ratio χ2 tests for interviewer, sex, age, education, working status, income, diagnosis, and health-status.
Results: The analysis included N = 556 patients. Median age was 68.4 (IQR: 62.0 - 76.0) years and mean overall GSE score 32.8 (SD: 4.81). No DIF was detected for interviewer. However, DIF was found in item 1 for education (uniform DIF, NCDIFno degree vs. degree = 0.042; easier with degree vs. none), in item 1 and 3 for income (item 1: non-uniform DIF, NCDIF<€ 1,125 vs.≥€ 1,125≤€ 1,950 = 0.050 / NCDIF< € 1,125 vs.≥€ 1,950 = 0.099; item 3: uniform DIF, NCDIF<€ 1,125 vs.≥€ 1,125-≤€ 1,950 = 0.024 / NCDIF< € 1,125 vs.≥€ 1,950: 0.095; both easier with higher income), in item 2 for working status (uniform DIF, NCDIFretired vs. other = 0.017; easier if working) and in item 3 for sex (non-uniform DIF, NCDIFmale vs. female = 0.043; easier for women in low ability, harder for them from medium ability on).
Conclusions: Given that no DIF was detected concerning interviewers, our findings indicate that an objective assessment of self-efficacy in a face-to-face interview may be feasible, provided that interviewers receive appropriate training. Since DIF effects concerning other patients characteristics found were small, the GSE may provide a relatively bias free way to assess self-efficacy in an interview setting.
期刊介绍:
BMC Psychology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers manuscripts on all aspects of psychology, human behavior and the mind, including developmental, clinical, cognitive, experimental, health and social psychology, as well as personality and individual differences. The journal welcomes quantitative and qualitative research methods, including animal studies.