Interviewing adolescent girls about sexual and reproductive health: a qualitative study exploring how best to ask questions in structured follow-up interviews in a randomized controlled trial in Zambia

Background Numerous studies have documented inconsistent reporting of sexual behaviour by adolescents. The validity and reliability of self-reported data on issues considered sensitive, incriminating or embarrassing, is prone to social-desirability bias. Some studies have found that Audio Computer-Assisted Self Interviewing (ACASI) that removes the personal interaction involved in face-to-face interviews, decreases item non-response and increases reporting of sensitive behaviours, but others have found inconsistent or contradictory results. To reduce social desirability bias in the reporting of sensitive behaviours, face-to-face interviews were combined with ACASI in a cluster randomized trial involving adolescents in Zambia. Methods To explore adolescent girls’ experiences and opinions of being interviewed about sexual and reproductive health, we combined Focus Group Discussions with girl participants and individual semi-structured interviews with teachers. This study was done after the participants had been interviewed for the 6th time since recruitment. Young, female research assistants who had conducted interviews for the trial were also interviewed for this study. Results Respondents explained often feeling shy, embarrassed or uncomfortable when asked questions about sex, pregnancy and abortion face-to-face. Questions on sexual activity elicited feelings of shame, and teachers, research assistants and girls alike noted that direct questions about sexual activities limit what the participant girls may be willing to share. Responding to more indirect questions in relation to the context of a romantic relationship was slightly easier. Efforts by interviewers to signal that they did not judge the participants for their behavior and increased familiarity with the interviewer reduced discomfort over time. Although some appreciated the opportunity to respond to questions on their own, the privacy offered by ACASI also provided an opportunity to give false answers. Answering on tablets could be challenging, but participants were reluctant to ask for assistance for fear of being judged as not conversant with technology. Conclusion Strategies to avoid using overly direct language and descriptive words, asking questions within the context of a romantic relationship and a focus on establishing familiarity and trust can reduce reporting bias. For the use of ACASI, considerations must be given to the context and characteristics of the study population.

Effectiveness of a Theory-Informed Documentary to Reduce Consumption of Meat and Animal Products: Three Randomized Controlled Experiments

Several societal issues could be mitigated by reducing global consumption of meat and animal products (MAP). In three randomized, controlled experiments (n=217 to 574), we evaluated the effects of a documentary that presents health, environmental, and animal welfare motivations for reducing MAP consumption. Study 1 assessed the documentary’s effectiveness at reducing reported MAP consumption after 12 days. This study used methodological innovations to minimize social desirability bias, a widespread limitation of past research. Study 2 investigated discrepancies between the results of Study 1 and those of previous studies by further examining the role of social desirability bias. Study 3 assessed the documentary’s effectiveness in a new population anticipated to be more responsive and upon enhancing the intervention content. We found that the documentary did not decrease reported MAP consumption when potential social desirability bias was minimized (Studies 1 and 3). The documentary also did not affect consumption among participants whose demographics suggested they might be more receptive (Study 3). However, the documentary did substantially increase intentions to reduce consumption, consistent with past studies (Studies 2 and 3). Overall, we conclude that some past studies of similar interventions may have overestimated effects due to methodological biases. Novel intervention strategies to reduce MAP consumption may be needed.

Physical Disability Affects Women’s but Not Men’s Perception of Opposite-Sex Attractiveness

Physical appearance influences our perceptions, judgments, and decision making about others. While the current literature with regard to the perceptions and judgments of nondisabled people’s attractiveness is robust, the research investigating the perceived physical attractiveness and judgments of physically disabled individuals is scarce. Therefore, in the current study, we investigated whether people with physical disabilities are perceived by the opposite sex as more or less attractive relative to nondisabled individuals. Our results, based on over 675 participants, showed a positive effect for women’s attractiveness ratings of men with physical disabilities, but not men’s attractiveness ratings of physically disabled women. Moreover, social desirability bias was positively associated with attractiveness ratings of physically disabled individuals, meaning those with higher tendency to be viewed favorably by others rated physically disabled individuals more attractive. Finally, our results revealed that attractiveness ratings of individuals with physical disabilities are positively associated with extroversion and empathy in both men and women, and positively with agreeableness and negatively with neuroticism in women. In conclusion, our study showed women rate men with physical disabilities as higher on attractiveness than nondisabled men, which is also influenced by their social desirability bias.

Measuring social desirability bias: Do the full and short versions of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability scale matter?

Given the sensitive nature of ethics research, the presence of social desirability bias (SDB) threatens the validity of research findings. As ethics studies often overlook this bias, we aimed to provide evidence that SDB varies across individual and situational factors. We thus investigated the influence of socio-demographic factors and survey modes on SDB. A total of 348 working adults were randomly chosen to participate in either an on-line or off-line survey containing eight versions of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability (MCSD) scale. The reliabilities for the eight versions ranged from 0.35 to 0.81. Statistical tests revealed that different socio-demographic factors influence different versions of the MCSD scale. The results also showed that using on-line surveys minimizes SDB. This study provides practical implications and suggestions for future research.

Effectiveness of a theory-informed documentary to reduce meat and animal-product consumption: Three randomized controlled experiments

Background: Several exigent societal issues could be mitigated by shifting global consumption of meat and animal products toward predominantly plant-based diets. Methods: We conducted 3 randomized controlled experiments (n=217 to 574) to test the effects of a professionally produced and disseminated, theory-informed documentary that presents health, environmental, and animal welfare motivations for reducing consumption of meat and animal products. In Study 1, we primarily assessed participants' reported 1-week consumption of meats and animal products, as reported 12 days after random assignment to view the documentary or a control video. In Study 2, in a similar sample, we assessed effects on participants' immediate intentions to change their consumption of these foods, comparable to most past studies. In Study 3, we used the design from Study 1 but in a new sample anticipated to be more responsive to the messages; we also enhanced the intervention with activities designed to increase engagement with the documentary and to prompt concrete goal setting. In Studies 1 and 3, we introduced methodological innovations to minimize social desirability bias, a widespread limitation of past research. Results: The documentary did not decrease meat and animal product compared to the control video when potential social desirability bias was minimized (Study 1: -0.33 oz/week; 95% CI: [-6.12, 5.46]; p=0.91; Study 3: -2.46 oz/week; 95% CI: [-8.78, 3.85]; p=0.43). The documentary also did not affect reported meat and animal-product consumption among participants whose demographics suggested they might be more receptive to the intervention (Study 3). However, the documentary did substantially increase the percentage of participants who immediately intended to reduce consumption, consistent with past studies (Study 2) and prompted a majority of viewers to pledge to reduce or eliminate their consumption of at least one meat or animal product (Study 3).Conclusions: These findings suggest that past studies of similar interventions may have overestimated effects due to methodological biases. Novel intervention strategies may be needed to meaningfully shift dietary consumption away from meat and animal products.Trial registration: Study 1: https://osf.io/m3d2y/; Study 2: https://osf.io/etpvf/; Study 3: https://osf.io/n52yd/.

Does Conjoint Analysis Mitigate Social Desirability Bias?

How can we elicit honest responses in surveys? Conjoint analysis has become a popular tool to address social desirability bias (SDB), or systematic survey misreporting on sensitive topics. However, there has been no direct evidence showing its suitability for this purpose. We propose a novel experimental design to identify conjoint analysis’s ability to mitigate SDB. Specifically, we compare a standard, fully randomized conjoint design against a partially randomized design where only the sensitive attribute is varied between the two profiles in each task. We also include a control condition to remove confounding due to the increased attention to the varying attribute under the partially randomized design. We implement this empirical strategy in two studies on attitudes about environmental conservation and preferences about congressional candidates. In both studies, our estimates indicate that the fully randomized conjoint design could reduce SDB for the average marginal component effect (AMCE) of the sensitive attribute by about two-thirds of the AMCE itself. Although encouraging, we caution that our results are exploratory and exhibit some sensitivity to alternative model specifications, suggesting the need for additional confirmatory evidence based on the proposed design.