Literature DB >> 11277355

The neglect of response bias in mental health research.

L H Rogler1, D K Mroczek, M Fellows, S T Loftus.   

Abstract

A number of researchers have observed that response biases, defined as when subjects respond to items in research instruments in ways that do not coincide with the intent or content of the instrument, suffuse measurements and assessments of mental disorders. They cautioned that the response bias problem has been neglected in mental health research at the price of substantial error. Have the cautions been heeded? Or does the neglect of response bias continue? Articles published in 1998 in three major psychiatric journals were examined: Archives of General Psychiatry, American Journal of Psychiatry, and the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. The articles were examined to determine whether response biases were mentioned and whether systematic efforts were made to attend to their influence on the findings of the study. Each article was assessed twice by independent raters. The examination indicates that a very small minority of the articles reviewed mentioned response bias and that among those mentioning it, a minority attempted to control for bias effects. Cautions offered about response bias have not been heeded. Accordingly, the issue is one of how to incorporate concerns about response bias into the institutional structures that influence the culture of mental health research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11277355     DOI: 10.1097/00005053-200103000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nerv Ment Dis        ISSN: 0022-3018            Impact factor:   2.254


  11 in total

Review 1.  Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: conceptual issues and research evidence.

Authors:  Ilan H Meyer
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 17.737

2.  Fostering integrity in research: definitions, current knowledge, and future directions.

Authors:  Nicholas H Steneck
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.525

3.  Differential item functioning between ethnic groups in the epidemiological assessment of depression.

Authors:  Joshua Breslau; Kristin N Javaras; Deborah Blacker; Jane M Murphy; Sharon-Lise T Normand
Journal:  J Nerv Ment Dis       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.254

4.  Specifying race-ethnic differences in risk for psychiatric disorder in a USA national sample.

Authors:  Joshua Breslau; Sergio Aguilar-Gaxiola; Kenneth S Kendler; Maxwell Su; David Williams; Ronald C Kessler
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2005-10-05       Impact factor: 7.723

Review 5.  Response Bias in Research on Religion, Spirituality and Mental Health: A Critical Review of the Literature and Methodological Recommendations.

Authors:  Everton de Oliveira Maraldi
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2020-04

6.  Disordered gambling among racial and ethnic groups in the US: results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions.

Authors:  A A Alegria; N M Petry; D S Hasin; Shang-Min Liu; B F Grant; C Blanco
Journal:  CNS Spectr       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.790

7.  Sex differences and gender-invariance of mother-reported childhood problem behavior.

Authors:  Sophie van der Sluis; Tinca J C Polderman; Michael C Neale; Frank C Verhulst; Danielle Posthuma; Gwen C Dieleman
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 4.035

8.  Misinformation increases symptom reporting: a test - retest study.

Authors:  Harald Merckelbach; Marko Jelicic; Maarten Pieters
Journal:  JRSM Short Rep       Date:  2011-10-06

9.  Why are there discrepancies between depressed patients' Global Rating of Change and scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire depression module? A qualitative study of primary care in England.

Authors:  Jude Robinson; Naila Khan; Louise Fusco; Alice Malpass; Glyn Lewis; Christopher Dowrick
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 10.  Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  Jan P Vandenbroucke; Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Peter C Gøtzsche; Cynthia D Mulrow; Stuart J Pocock; Charles Poole; James J Schlesselman; Matthias Egger
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2007-10-16       Impact factor: 11.069

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.