Dataset Information

Faking self-reports of health behavior: a comparison between a within- and a between-subjects design.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This study examines people's ability to fake their reported health behavior and explores the magnitude of such response distortion concerning faking of preventive health behavior and health risk behavior. As health behavior is a sensitive topic, people usually prefer privacy about it or they wish to create a better image of themselves (Fekken et al., 2012; Levy et al., 2018). Nevertheless, health behavior is often assessed by self-report questionnaires that are prone to faking. Therefore, it is important to examine the possible impact of such faking.

Methods

To replicate the findings and test their robustness, two study designs were realized. In the within-subjects-design, 142 participants repeatedly answered a health behavior questionnaire with an instruction to answer honestly, fake good, and fake bad. In the between-subjects design, 128 participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups that filled out the health behavior questionnaire with only one of the three instructions.

Results

Both studies showed that successful faking of self-reported preventive and health risk behavior was possible. The magnitude of such faking effects was very large in the within-subjects design and somewhat smaller in the between-subjects design.

Conclusion

Even though each design has its inherent merits and problems, caution is indicated regarding faking effects.

SUBMITTER: Egele VS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8547881 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Faking self-reports of health behavior: a comparison between a within- and a between-subjects design.

Egele Viktoria S VS Kiefer Laura H LH Stark Robin R

Health psychology and behavioral medicine 20211022 1

<h4>Background</h4>This study examines people's ability to fake their reported health behavior and explores the magnitude of such response distortion concerning faking of preventive health behavior and health risk behavior. As health behavior is a sensitive topic, people usually prefer privacy about it or they wish to create a better image of themselves (Fekken et al., 2012; Levy et al., 2018). Nevertheless, health behavior is often assessed by self-report questionnaires that are prone to faking ...[more]

PMID: 34712514

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStudies examining whether genetic risk information about common, complex diseases can motivate individuals to improve health behaviors and advance planning have shown mixed results. Examining the influence of different study recruitment strategies may help reconcile inconsistencies.MethodsSecondary analyses were conducted on data from the REVEAL study, a series of randomized clinical trials examining the impact of genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer's disease (AD). We tested whether self-referred participants (SRPs) were more likely than actively recruited participants (ARPs) to report health behavior and advance planning changes after AD risk and APOE genotype disclosure.ResultsOf 795 participants with known recruitment status, 546 (69%) were self-referred and 249 (31%) had been actively recruited. SRPs were younger, less likely to identify as African American, had higher household incomes, and were more attentive to AD than ARPs (all P < 0.01). They also dropped out of the study before genetic risk disclosure less frequently (26% versus 41%, P < 0.001). Cohorts did not differ in their likelihood of reporting a change to at least one health behavior 6 weeks and 12 months after genetic risk disclosure, nor in intentions to change at least one behavior in the future. However, interaction effects were observed where ε4-positive SRPs were more likely than ε4-negative SRPs to report changes specifically to mental activities (38% vs 19%, p < 0.001) and diets (21% vs 12%, p = 0.016) six weeks post-disclosure, whereas differences between ε4-positive and ε4-negative ARPs were not evident for mental activities (15% vs 21%, p = 0.413) or diets (8% versus 16%, P = 0.190). Similarly, ε4-positive participants were more likely than ε4-negative participants to report intentions to change long-term care insurance among SRPs (20% vs 5%, p < 0.001), but not ARPs (5% versus 9%, P = 0.365).ConclusionsIndividuals who proactively seek AD genetic risk assessment are more likely to undergo testing and use results to inform behavior changes than those who respond to genetic testing offers. These results demonstrate how the behavioral impact of genetic risk information may vary according to the models by which services are provided, and suggest that how participants are recruited into translational genomics research can influence findings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00089882 and NCT00462917.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Skin cancer is the most prevalent cancer in Australia. Skin cancer prevention programs aim to reduce sun exposure and increase sun protection behaviors. Effectiveness is usually assessed through self-report. OBJECTIVE:It was the aim of this study to test the acceptance and validity of a newly developed ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure app, designed to reduce the data collection burden to research participants. Physical activity data was collected because a strong focus on sun avoidance may result in unhealthy reductions in physical activity. This paper provides lessons learned from collecting data from participants using paper diaries, a mobile app, dosimeters, and accelerometers for measuring end-points of UVR exposure and physical activity. METHODS:Two participant groups were recruited through social and traditional media campaigns 1) Group A-UVR Diaries and 2) Group B-Physical Activity. In Group A, nineteen participants wore an UVR dosimeter wristwatch (University of Canterbury, New Zealand) when outside for 7 days. They also recorded their sun exposure and physical activity levels using both 1) the UVR diary app and 2) a paper UVR diary. In Group B, 55 participants wore an accelerometer (Actigraph, Pensacola, FL, USA) for 14 days and completed the UVR diary app. Data from the UVR diary app were compared with UVR dosimeter wristwatch, accelerometer, and paper UVR diary data. Cohen kappa coefficient score was used to determine if there was agreement between categorical variables for different UVR data collection methods and Spearman rank correlation coefficient was used to determine agreement between continuous accelerometer data and app-collected self-report physical activity. RESULTS:The mean age of participants in Groups A (n=19) and B (n=55) was 29.3 and 25.4 years, and 63% (12/19) and 75% (41/55) were females, respectively. Self-reported sun exposure data in the UVR app correlated highly with UVR dosimetry (κ=0.83, 95% CI 0.64-1.00, P<.001). Correlation between self-reported UVR app and accelerometer-collected moderate to vigorous physical activity data was low (ρ=0.23, P=.10), while agreement for low-intensity physical activity was significantly different (ρ=-0.49, P<.001). Seventy-nine percent of participants preferred the app over the paper diary for daily self-report of UVR exposure and physical activity. CONCLUSIONS:This feasibility study highlights self-report using an UVR app can reliably collect personal UVR exposure, but further improvements are required before the app can also be used to collect physical activity data.

Project description:BackgroundSocial media are an increasingly commonly used platform for delivering health promotion interventions. Although recent research has focused on the effectiveness of social media interventions for health promotion, very little is known about the optimal content within such interventions, and the active ingredients to promote health behavior change using social media are not clear. Identifying which behavior change techniques (BCTs) are reported may help to clarify the content of interventions using a generalizable terminology that may facilitate future intervention development.ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify which BCTs are reported in social media interventions for promoting health behavior change in adults.MethodsWe included 71 studies conducted with adult participants (aged ≥18 years) and for which social media intervention was considered interactive in a Cochrane review of the effectiveness of such interventions. We developed a coding manual informed by the Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy version 1 (BCTTv1) to identify BCTs in the included studies. We identified BCTs in all study arms (including control) and described BCTs in the group and self-directed components of studies. We characterized the dose of delivery for each BCT by low and high intensity. We used descriptive analyses to characterize the reported BCTs.ResultsOur data consisted of 71 studies published from 2001 to 2017, mainly conducted in high-income countries (n=65). Most studies (n=31) used tailored, interactive websites to deliver the intervention; Facebook was the most used mainstream platform. In developing our coding manual, we adapted some BCTTv1 instructions to better capture unique nuances of how BCTs were operationalized in social media with respect to likes, retweets, smiles, congratulations, and badges. Social support (unspecified), instruction on how to perform the behavior, and credible source were most frequently identified BCTs in intervention arms of studies and group-delivery settings, whereas instruction on how to perform the behavior was most commonly applied in self-directed components of studies, control arms, and individual participant settings. Instruction on how to perform the behavior was also the most frequently reported BCT in both intervention and control arms simultaneously. Instruction on how to perform the behavior, social support (unspecified), self-monitoring of behavior, information about health consequences, and credible source were identified in the top 5 BCTs delivered with the highest intensity.ConclusionsThis study within a review provides a detailed description of the BCTs and their dose to promote behavior change in web-based, interactive social media interventions. Clarifying active ingredients in social media interventions and the intensity of their delivery may help to develop future interventions that can more clearly build upon the existing evidence.

Project description:BackgroundData on resource use are frequently required for healthcare assessments. Studies on healthcare utilization (HCU) in individuals with mental disorders have analyzed both self-reports and administrative data. Source of data may affect the quality of analysis and compromise the accuracy of results. We sought to ascertain the degree of agreement between self-reports and statutory health insurance (SHI) fund claims data from patients with mental disorders.MethodsClaims data from six German SHI and self-reports were obtained along with a cost-effectiveness analysis performed as a part of a controlled prospective multicenter cohort study conducted in 18 psychiatric hospitals in Germany (PsychCare), including patients with pre-defined psychiatric disorders. Self-reports were collected using the German adaption of the Client Sociodemographic and Service Receipt Inventory (CSSRI) questionnaire with a 6-month recall period. Data linkage was performed using a unique pseudonymized identifier. Missing responses were coded as non-use for all analyses. HCU was calculated for inpatient and outpatient care, day-care services, home treatment, and pharmaceuticals. Concordance was measured using Cohen's Kappa (κ) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Regression approaches were used to investigate the effect of independent variables on the agreements.ResultsIn total 274 participants (mean age 47.8 [SD = 14.2] years; 47.08% women) were included in the analysis. No significant differences were observed between the linked and unlinked patients in terms of baseline characteristics. Total agreements values were 63.9% (κ = 0.03; PABAK = 0.28) for outpatient contacts, 69.3% (κ = 0.25; PABAK = 0.39) for medication use, 81.0% (κ = 0.56; PABAK = 0.62) for inpatient days and 86.1% (κ = 0.67; PABAK = 0.72) for day-care services. There was varied quantitative agreement between data sources, with the poorest agreement for outpatient care (ICC [95% CI] = 0.22 [0.10-0.33]) and the best for psychiatric day-care services (ICC [95% CI] = 0.72 [0.66-0.78]). Marital status and time since first treatment positively affected the chance of agreement on utilization of outpatient services.ConclusionsAlthough there were high levels of absolute agreement, the measures of concordance between administrative records and self-reports were generally minimal to moderate. Healthcare investigations should consider using linked or at least different data sources to estimate HCU for specific utilization areas, where unbiased information can be expected.Trial registrationThis study was part of the multi-center controlled PsychCare trial (German Clinical Trials Register No. DRKS00022535; Date of registration: 2020-10-02).

Dataset Information

Faking self-reports of health behavior: a comparison between a within- and a between-subjects design.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Faking self-reports of health behavior: a comparison between a within- and a between-subjects design.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets