Item desirability bias and the bat checklist: A reply to Waltman and Burleson
- 1 April 1997
- journal article
- other
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Communication Education
- Vol. 46 (2) , 95-99
- https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529709379078
Abstract
In response to Waltman and Burleson's indictment that the Kearney et al. Behavior Alteration Technique checklist suffers from an item desirability bias, we submit two major arguments which undermine altogether their claim. We illustrate that their entire allegation rests on first, a faulty premise (i.e., a distortion of the literature documenting what teachers actually do in the classroom) and second, on an indefensible research design which fails to test their contention.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- The strategy selection‐construction controversy II: Comparing pre‐and experienced teachers' compliance‐gaining message constructionsCommunication Education, 1990
- The strategy selection‐construction controversy: A coding scheme for analyzing teacher compliance‐gaining message constructionsCommunication Education, 1989
- Comments on the Utility of Compliance-Gaining Message Selection TasksHuman Communication Research, 1988
- Failure of the Social Desirability Response Set HypothesisHuman Communication Research, 1988
- Colloquy on Item Desirability A Response to "Item Desirability in Compliance-Gaining Research"Human Communication Research, 1988
- Experienced and prospective teachers' selections of compliance‐gaining messages for “common” student misbehaviorsCommunication Education, 1988
- Situational and Individual Determinants of Teachers' Reported Use of Behavior Alteration TechniquesHuman Communication Research, 1987
- Power in the classroom V: Behavior alteration techniques, communication training and learningCommunication Education, 1985
- Power in the classroom III: Teacher communication techniques and messagesCommunication Education, 1985
- Power in the classroom I: Teacher and student perceptionsCommunication Education, 1983