Browsing by Author "Howard, George S."

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The feasibility of informed pretests in attenuating response-shift bias
    (1979) Howard, George S.; Dailey, Patrick R.; Gulanick, Nancy A.
    Response-shift bias has been shown to contaminate self-reported pretest/posttest evaluations of various interventions. To eliminate the detrimental effects of response shifts, retrospective measures have been employed as substitutes for the traditional self-reported pretest. Informed pretests, wherein subjects are provided information about the construct being measured prior to completing the pretest self-report, are considered in the present studies as an alternative method to retrospective pretests in reducing response-shift effects. In Study 1 subjects were given a 20-minute presentation on assertiveness, which failed to significantly improve the accuracy of self-reported assertiveness. Other procedural influences hypothesized to improve self-report accuracy-previous experience with the objective measure of assertiveness and previous completion of the self-report measure-also were not related to increased self-report accuracy. In a second study, information about interviewing skills was provided at pretest using behaviorally anchored rating scales to participants in a workshop on interviewing skills. Response-shift bias was not attenuated by providing subjects with information about interviewing prior to the intervention. Change measures which employed retrospective pretest measures demonstrated somewhat higher (although nonsignificant) validity coefficients than measures of change utilizing informed pretest data.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Influence of subject response style effects on retrospective measures
    (1981) Howard, George S.; Millham, Jim; Slaten, Stephen; O'Donnell, Louise
    Recent attempts to reduce internal invalidity in studies employing pretest/posttest self-report indices of improvement have included the refinement of methodologies employing retrospective reports of pre-treatment states. The present study investigated the operation of social desirability and impression management response bias on such retrospective measures. The results do not support the hypothesis of greater bias on retrospective measurement and, in fact, are in a direction that might suggest an interpretation of reduced bias on such measures. The results also continue to support superior validity of retrospective over traditional pretest/posttest indices of improvement following treatment.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Internal invalidity in pretest-posttest self-report evaluations and a re-evaluation of retrospective pretests.
    (1979) Howard, George S.; Ralph, Kenneth M.; Gulanick, Nancy A.; Maxwell, Scott E.; Nance, Don W.; Gerber, Sterling K.
    True experimental designs (Designs 4, 5, and 6 of Campbell & Stanley, 1963) are thought to provide internally valid results. This paper describes five studies involving the evaluation of various treatment interventions and identifies a source of internal invalidity when self-report measures are used in a Pretest-Posttest manner. An alternative approach (Retrospective Pretest-Posttest design) to measuring change is suggested, and data comparing its accuracy with the traditional Pretest-Posttest design in measuring treatment effects is presented. Finally, the implications of these findings for evaluation research using self-report instruments and the strengths and limitations of retrospective measures are discussed.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Is a behavioral measure the best estimate of behavioral parameters? Perhaps not.
    (1980) Howard, George S.; Maxwell, Scott E.; Wiener, Richard L.; Boynton, Kathy S.; Rooney, William M.
    In many areas of psychological research various measurement procedures are employed in order to obtain estimates of some set of parameter values. A common practice is to validate one measurement device by demonstrating its relationship to some criterion. However, in many cases the measurement of that criterion is less than a perfect estimate of true parameters. Self-report measures are often validated by comparing them with behavioral measures of the dimension of interest. This procedure is only justifiable insofar as the behavioral measure represents an accurate estimate of population parameters. Three studies, dealing with the assessment of assertiveness, students’ in-class verbal and nonverbal behaviors, and a number of teacher-student in-class interactions, tested the adequacy of behavioral versus self-report measures as accurate estimates of behavioral parameters. In Studies 2 and 3 self-reports were found to be as good as behavioral measures as estimates of behavioral parameters, while Study 1 found self-reports to be significantly superior.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Linked raters' judgments: Combating problems of statistical conclusion validity
    (1983) Howard, George S.; Obledo, Fernando H.; Cole, David A.; Maxwell, Scott E.
    The traditional procedure for obtaining judged ratings, to ascertain if treatment-related change has occurred, involves the randomization of the materials to be rated. An alternative approach (linked judgments) is investigated as a potential solution to certain instrumentation- related threats to statistical conclusion validity of the incumbent rating procedure. Data from a weight reduction study are presented which suggest that linked raters’ judgments provide both a more powerful and a more valid index of treatment effectiveness than the traditional procedure.