Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36867339›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2024

Accounting for careless and insufficient effort responding in large-scale survey data-development, evaluation, and application of a screen-time-based weighting procedure.

Esther Ulitzsch, Hyo Jeong Shin, Oliver Lüdtke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Esther UlitzschIPN-Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Educational Measurement, Olshausenstraße 62, 24118, Kiel, Germany. ulitzsch@leibniz-ipn.de.ORCID 0000-0002-9267-8542
Hyo Jeong ShinSogang University, Seoul, South Korea.
Oliver LüdtkeIPN-Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Educational Measurement, Olshausenstraße 62, 24118, Kiel, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Careless and insufficient effort responding (C/IER) poses a major threat to the quality of large-scale survey data. Traditional indicator-based procedures for its detection are limited in that they are only sensitive to specific types of C/IER behavior, such as straight lining or rapid responding, rely on arbitrary threshold settings, and do not allow taking the uncertainty of C/IER classification into account. Overcoming these limitations, we develop a two-step screen-time-based weighting procedure for computer-administered surveys. The procedure allows considering the uncertainty in C/IER identification, is agnostic towards the specific types of C/IE response patterns, and can feasibly be integrated with common analysis workflows for large-scale survey data. In Step 1, we draw on mixture modeling to identify subcomponents of log screen time distributions presumably stemming from C/IER. In Step 2, the analysis model of choice is applied to item response data, with respondents' posterior class probabilities being employed to downweigh response patterns according to their probability of stemming from C/IER. We illustrate the approach on a sample of more than 400,000 respondents being administered 48 scales of the PISA 2018 background questionnaire. We gather supporting validity evidence by investigating relationships between C/IER proportions and screen characteristics that entail higher cognitive burden, such as screen position and text length, relating identified C/IER proportions to other indicators of C/IER as well as by investigating rank-order consistency in C/IER behavior across screens. Finally, in a re-analysis of the PISA 2018 background questionnaire data, we investigate the impact of the C/IER adjustments on country-level comparisons.

Indexed as

Screen TimeHumansProbabilitySurveys and QuestionnairesUncertaintyCareless respondingData screeningFinite mixture modelingItem response theoryMaximum pseudo-likelihood estimationScreen times

Identifiers

PMID36867339
PMCPMC10830617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.