The Feasibility of Informed Pretests in Attenuating Response-Shift Bias

Response-shift bias has been shown to contami nate self-reported pretest/posttest evaluations of various interventions. To eliminate the detrimental effects of response shifts, retrospective measures have been employed as substitutes for the tradi tional self-reported pretest. Informed pretests, wherein subjects are provided information about the construct being measured prior to completing the pretest self-report, are considered in the present studies as an alternative method to retrospective pretests in reducing response-shift effects. In Study 1 subjects were given a 20-minute presentation on assertiveness, which failed to significantly improve the accuracy of self-reported assertiveness. Other procedural influences hypothesized to improve self- report accuracy—previous experience with the ob jective measure of assertiveness and previous com pletion of the self-report measure—also were not related to increased self-report accuracy. In a second study, information about interviewing skills was provided at pretest using behaviorally anchored rating scales to participants in a workshop on in terviewing skills. Response-shift bias was not at tentuated by providing subjects with information about interviewing prior to the intervention. Change measures which employed retrospective pretest measures demonstrated somewhat higher (although nonsignificant) validity coefficients than measures of change utilizing informed pretest data.

[1]  George S. Howard,et al.  Influence of Subject Response Style Effects on Retrospective Measures , 1981 .

[2]  S. Maxwell,et al.  Evaluating Planned Organizational Change: A Proposed Method for the Assessment of Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Change at the Individual and Group Level. , 1979 .

[3]  George S. Howard,et al.  Response-shift bias: A source of contamination of self-report measures. , 1979 .

[4]  Scott E. Maxwell,et al.  Internal Invalidity in Pretest-Posttest Self-Report Evaluations and a Re-evaluation of Retrospective Pretests , 1979 .

[5]  Robert L. Linn,et al.  The Determination of the Significance of Change Between Pre- and Posttesting Periods , 1977 .

[6]  J. Galassi,et al.  Behavioral performance in the validation of an assertiveness scale , 1976 .

[7]  Robert T. Golembiewski,et al.  Measuring Change and Persistence in Human Affairs: Types of Change Generated by OD Designs , 1976 .

[8]  Donald P. Schwab,et al.  Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales: A Review of the Literature. , 1975 .

[9]  C. Hill,et al.  A microtraining approach to assertion training. , 1975 .

[10]  J. Galassi,et al.  The college self-expression scale: A measure of assertiveness , 1974 .

[11]  M. Hersen,et al.  Components of assertive behavior. , 1973, Journal of clinical psychology.

[12]  S. Rathus.  Instigation of assertive behavior through videotape-mediated assertive models and directed practice. , 1973, Behaviour research and therapy.

[13]  H. Chuan.  Evaluation by interview. , 1972, Nursing outlook.

[14]  M. Reres.  Training in Depth Interviewing , 1972 .

[15]  L. Cronbach,et al.  How we should measure "change": Or should we? , 1970 .

[16]  P. C. Smith,et al.  Retranslation of expectations: An approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. , 1963 .

[17]  J. C. Flanagan.  The critical incident technique. , 1954, Psychological bulletin.