Can detailed instructions and comprehension checks increase the validity of crosswise model estimates?

Julia Meisters, Adrian Hoffmann and Jochen Musch

PLOS ONE, 2020, vol. 15, issue 6, 1-19

Abstract: The crosswise model is an indirect questioning technique designed to control for socially desirable responding. Although the technique has delivered promising results in terms of improved validity in survey studies of sensitive issues, recent studies have indicated that the crosswise model may sometimes produce false positives. Hence, we investigated whether an insufficient understanding of the crosswise model instructions might be responsible for these false positives and whether ensuring a deeper understanding of the model and surveying more highly educated respondents reduces the problem of false positives. To this end, we experimentally manipulated the amount of information respondents received in the crosswise model instructions. We compared a crosswise model condition with only brief instructions and a crosswise model condition with detailed instructions and additional comprehension checks. Additionally, we compared the validity of crosswise model estimates between a higher- and a lower-educated subgroup of respondents. Our results indicate that false positives among highly educated respondents can be reduced when detailed instructions and comprehension checks are employed. Since false positives can also occur in direct questioning, they do not appear to be a specific flaw of the crosswise model, but rather a more general problem of self-reports on sensitive topics. False negatives were found to occur for all questioning techniques, but were less prevalent in the crosswise model than in the direct questioning condition. We highlight the importance of comprehension checks when applying indirect questioning and emphasize the necessity of developing instructions suitable for lower-educated respondents.

Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0235403 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 35403&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0235403

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235403

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().