Careless Responding to Reverse-Worded Items: Implications for Confirmatory Factor Analysis

By Carol M. Woods. 2006

409 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Management Science and Operations Research, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/170c13dfb6d23af5aabb147edfca922976f4ea53

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Are Attention Check Questions a Threat to Scale Validity? (2018, background): “…on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense in general, have shown great success in screening out careless survey respondents to protect the validity of scale measurement (see Meade & Craig, 2012; Woods, 2006).”
Caring about carelessness: Participant inattention and its effects on research. (2014, background): “Similarly, inattentive responding can adversely affect correlational and factor analyses (Johnson, 2005; Meade & Craig, 2012; Woods, 2006), moderating findings even to the point of generating spurious results.”
Identifying careless responses in survey data. (2012, background): “Additionally, careless responding on reversecoded items can contribute to the presence of so-called “method” factors, in which positively worded items for a given scale load onto one factor, while negatively worded items for the same scale load onto another (Woods, 2006).”
How Careless Responding and Acquiescence Response Bias Can Influence Construct Dimensionality (2015, methodology): “The term careless responding has been applied broadly to describe patterns of responding in which participants pay insufficient attention to item content (Barnette, 1999; Huang, Curran, Keeney, Poposki, & DeShon, 2012; Maniaci & Rogge, 2014; Schmitt & Stults, 1985; Woods, 2006).”
Dirty Data: The Effects of Screening Respondents Who Provide Low-Quality Data in Survey Research (2017, background): “Other research demonstrates that the inclusion of these participants is associated with changes in factor structure (Schmitt & Stults, 1985; Woods, 2006), decreases in validity estimates (Hough et al., 1990; Liu, Huang, Bowling, & Bragg, 2013), and decreases in estimates of internal consistency and…”
Shifting gears: consequences of including two negatively worded items in the middle of a positively worded questionnaire (2010, background): “The aberrant psychometric behaviour of negatively worded items has been attributed primarily to non-attendance to item content, either due to carelessness (e.g. Holden and Fekken 1990; Kennedy 2008; Schmitt and Stults 1985; Woods 2006) or to difficulty in interpreting the questions (e.”
Fear of Death and Supernatural Beliefs: Developing A New Supernatural Belief Scale to Test the Relationship (2013, neutral): “…questionnaires, observer ratings), content categories, similarly worded test items, or reverse scoring (cf. Barnette, 2000; Brown, 2006; Crawford & Henry, 2004; Knight, Chisholm,Marsh, &Godfrey, 1988;Marsh, 1996;Motl & DiStefano, 2002; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003; Woods, 2006).”
Factors Influencing Teaching Choice, Professional Plans about Teaching, and Future Time Perspective: A Mediational Analysis. (2010, background): “This may be due to the careless responding of participants to reverse-worded items (Woods, 2006).”
Measuring well-being: A comparison of subjective well-being and PERMA (2018, background): “Negatively worded items have been shown to load onto their own factors for purely methodological reasons (Marsh, 1996; Woods, 2006).”
Careless responding in questionnaire measures: Detection, impact, and remedies (2020, background): “In contrast to previous study findings that reported an increase of model fit after careless respondents had been removed, however, (Huang et al., 2012; Woods, 2006), no clear pattern emerged when we examined the fit of the measurement models across the response samples in Study 2.”
The scales of general well-being (SGWB) (2017, background): “…particularly in long questionnaires (DeVellis, 2012; van Sonderen et al., 2013); they can produce factor structure problems (Schmitt & Stults, 1985; Woods, 2006); they were less effective in measuring well-being constructs like flow (Jackson & Eklund, 2004) and vitality (Bostic, Rubio & Hood,…”
Development and Validation of the College Mattering Inventory With Diverse Urban College Students (2009, background): “Note that reverse-worded items have been found to decrease the reliability and internal consistency of scales and sometimes lead to a form of method factor in which negative items result in one factor and positive items in another (Hazlett-Stevens, Ullman, & Craske, 2004; Woods, 2006).”
Detecting and Deterring Insufficient Effort Responding to Surveys (2012, background): “A similar finding by Woods (2006) showed that 10% of simulated careless responses to negatively keyed items could lead to rejection of a one-factor model in confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).”
The Self-Compassion Scale is a Valid and Theoretically Coherent Measure of Self-Compassion (2016, methodology): “…to be sensitive to positive versus negative affect, and there may have been a method effect which accounted for the fact that all positive items tended to load on one factor and all negative items on another that had little to do with substantive item content (DiStefano and Motl 2006; Woods 2006).”
What Shall We Do About Grit? A Critical Review of What We Know and What We Don’t Know (2018, neutral): “…to answer (Swain, Weathers, & Niedrich, 2008), especially for individuals with lower levels of reading ability (e.g., Marsh, 1986), and also because they can lower the reliability and validity of scale scores (Woods, 2006) and artificially create distinct factors (e.g., Schmitt & Stults, 1985).”