Related Experiment Videos
Summary
Self-report well-being scales are generally accurate. Controlling for social desirability bias did not improve, and even reduced, the validity of well-being measures in this study.
Area of Science:
- Psychology
- Social Psychology
- Personality Psychology
Background:
- Concerns exist regarding the validity of self-report well-being measures.
- Socially desirable responding (SDR) is a potential confound in subjective assessments.
- The impact of SDR on well-being scales requires empirical investigation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate whether well-being scales are contaminated by socially desirable responding.
- To assess the effect of controlling for social desirability on the validity of well-being measures.
- To determine if self-reported well-being is a veridical assessment.
Main Methods:
- Three well-being measures were administered to 62 adults.
- Peer ratings of neuroticism served as an external criterion.
- Correlations between well-being, neuroticism, and social desirability were analyzed before and after statistical control for SDR.
Main Results:
- Social desirability was significantly correlated with peer-rated neuroticism.
- Controlling for social desirability bias decreased, rather than increased, the validity of well-being measures.
- The external validity of well-being measures was compromised by statistical adjustments for SDR.
Conclusions:
- Self-reports of well-being can generally be considered veridical assessments.
- Adjusting for social desirability may reduce, not enhance, the validity of well-being measures.
- Findings challenge the notion that well-being scales are inherently contaminated by SDR.