ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Reconstructing individual responses to direct questions: a new method for reconstructing malingered responses.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The false consensus effect consists of an overestimation of how common a subject opinion is among other people. This research demonstrates that individual endorsement of questions may be predicted by estimating peers' responses to the same question. Moreover, we aim to demonstrate how this prediction can be used to reconstruct the individual's response to a single item as well as the overall response to all of the items, making the technique suitable and effective for malingering detection. Method: We have validated the procedure of reconstructing individual responses from peers' estimation in two separate studies, one addressing anxiety-related questions and the other to the Dark Triad. The questionnaires, adapted to our scopes, were submitted to the groups of participants for a total of 187 subjects across both studies. Machine learning models were used to estimate the results. Results: According to the results, individual responses to a single question requiring a "yes" or "no" response are predicted with 70-80% accuracy. The overall participant-predicted score on all questions (total test score) is predicted with a correlation of 0.7-0.77 with actual results. Discussion: The application of the false consensus effect format is a promising procedure for reconstructing truthful responses in forensic settings when the respondent is highly likely to alter his true (genuine) response and true responses to the tests are missing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.