Citation

Li CR, Follingstad DR, Campe MI, Chahal JK. J. Interpers. Violence 2020; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Affiliation

University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2020, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0886260520918588

PMID

32401143

Abstract

Self-report surveys that are online, lengthy, and contain sensitive material greatly increase the probability of invalid responding (IR) on the instrument. Most research to inform our identification of invalid responders have not been able to test their methodologies where all these conditions are present. This study systematically adopted 10 IR indicators based on direct, archival, and statistic strategies to identify IR providing answers on a lengthy survey collecting campus climate/violence information that college students (N = 6,995) accessed online. Exploratory factor analysis indicated two internal factors (i.e., careless and extreme responding) underlying these IR indicators. Latent class analysis identified 4.8% of the sample as being invalid responders. Compared with honest responders, invalid responders were significantly more likely to report forms of victimization and a greater negative impact from physical abuse or sexual assault. Of importance, mean scores on victimization scales were significantly higher for invalid responders, illustrating the potential for IR data to skew prevalence rates. IR indicators differentially identified honest and invalid responders. The findings of this study contribute to the systematic investigation of IR with college students completing online and lengthy surveys that address sensitive material.

Language: en

Keywords

college surveys; invalid responding; statistical strategies for invalid responding; survey measurement