Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40954398›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2025

Bayesian factor mixture modeling with response time for detecting careless respondents.

Lijin Zhang, Esther Ulitzsch, Benjamin W Domingue

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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.

Lijin ZhangGraduate School of Education, Stanford University, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA. lijinzhang@stanford.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4222-8850
Esther UlitzschCentre for Educational Measurement (CEMO), University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9267-8542
Benjamin W DomingueGraduate School of Education, Stanford University, 520 Galvez Mall, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3894-9049

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Careless respondents inject noise into data which can distort research findings and compromise model fit. To address this, factor mixture modeling (FMM) has been widely used to identify careless respondents. Traditionally, researchers have relied on reverse-worded questions in FMM to facilitate the detection of careless responding. With the rise of online data collection platforms, response time has appeal as a means for understanding careless behavior. We introduce a Bayesian FMM that leverages this rich source of information to identify careless respondents. By jointly modeling responses and response time, this approach effectively identifies careless individuals rushing through the questionnaire without providing responses that reflect the to-be-measured traits. Our simulation studies demonstrate that this model accurately estimates parameters and classifies respondents as either attentive or careless, while maintaining error rates within acceptable limits. Furthermore, integrating response time enhances model convergence and the precision of classification and estimation. Using mediation models as an example, we illustrate how social science researchers can use this FMM approach to address careless responding in substantive research. An empirical study further tests the applicability of the proposed model in real-world scenarios, comparing its conclusions with traditional methods. To support its use, we provide an R function to streamline implementation.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalReaction TimeBayes TheoremComputer SimulationHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesBayesian AnalysisFactor Mixture ModelingStructural Equation ModelingSurvey Research

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.