xx Relying on clients to describe issues honestly or self-report on certain aspects of their life or their symptoms is an integral part of the clinical assessment process. Clients inform psychology professionals about issues are troublesome, family histories, medical histories, mental health information, symptoms and much more. However, there are some limitations in relying on self reporting. Inaccuracies may occur in self-reporting due to many issues. Such inaccuracies may result from deliberate deception, response biases, cultural tendencies or diathesis-stress issues.
Gathering information on a client through written survey may produce less than advantageous results as such self-reporting tactics may result in varying response styles, such as: inconsistent responding, acquiescence, negativism, extreme responding, or moderacy. Inconsistent responding involves answering in a random manner. For example, an inconsistent responder may vary their answers for similar questions without reason. Acquiescent respondents tend to choose positive choices, while negativism responders will choose to prefer negative choices, for instance, when asked if they like something, the acquiescent responder will say yes; the negative responder will say no, regardless of the statement’s validity. Additionally, there is extreme responding, where the respondent will tend to respond in extremes, and moderacy, where the respondent will neutralize answers (McGrath et al., 2010). These are examples of self-reporting biases in measurement, generally found in written questionnaires, however, there are also biases that occur in verbal assessments that are used in diagnosing mental disorders.
Biases in verbal assessment that may occur are: positive impression management, negative impression management, inaccurate responding cultural tendencies, or diathesis-stress issues. Positive impression management involves the respondent omitting or underreporting information that may not be desirable for their self-image. For instance, a client who does not disclose the full severity of their symptoms because they want to give a good impression (Hunsley, et al.,1996; McGrath, et al, 2010; Paulhus, 1984). Negative impression management involves the respondent exaggerating or over-reporting information. For instance, a client that makes up symptoms to qualify for disability insurance (Hunsley, et al.,1996; McGrath, et al, 2010). Inaccurate respondents lack the required self-awareness to be fully informed about their symptoms (McGrath, et al., 2010; Siebert, et al., 2010). The inability to respond in a helpful manner is not based on a desire to deceive, yet may be due to a psychopathology, or substance or alcohol abuse that makes it impossible to respond honestly (Seibert, et al., 1996). Cultural tendencies involve a response style that is manifested through learned behavior of a particular culture. For example, a client who responds in a dialectic thinking style that may appear contradictory (Hamamura, Heine & Paulhus, 2008). Diathesis-stress issues may occur when a client has a predisposition for a disorder, i.e., depression in women, cause the respondent to answer in a way that is concurrent with their predisposition (Driscoll, Lopez, & Kistner, 2009).
Psychology professionals place great importance on determining truth. The truth from their clients assist in producing truthful diagnoses. As shown, there are many complications that may cause errors in the assessment process of clients. Many different bias indicator tests have been developed for use in assessment to reduce misrepresentations, however it has been hypothesized that simply inconsistent responding may be a clear indicator for biases in self-reporting (McGrath et al. 2010). At any rate, It is important for psychology professionals to be aware of the many ways self-reporting may cause inaccuracies as it directly affects diagnosis of disorders.
References
Driscoll, K.A., Lopez, C.M., & Kistner, J.A. (2009). A diathesis-stress test of response styles in children. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 28(8), 1050-1070.
Hamamura, T., Heine, S.J., & Paulus, D.L. (2008). Cultural differences in response styles: The role of dialectical thinking. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 932-942.
Hunsley, J., Vito, D., Pinsent, C., James, S., & Lefebvre, M. (1996). Are self-report measures of dyadic relationships influenced by impression management biases? Journal of Family Psychology, 10(3), 322-330.
McGrath, R.E., Michell, M., Kim, B.H., & Hough, L. (2010). Evidence for response bias as a source of error variance in applied assessment, 136(3), 450-470.
Paulhus, D.L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(3), 598-609.
Seibert, L.A., Miller, J.D., Few, L.R., Zeichner, A., & Lynam, D.R. (2010). An examination of the structure of self-report psychopathy measures and their relations with general traits and externalizing behaviors. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment.
