MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390979986 · doi:10.31219/osf.io/x5rej

The Interaction of Survey Mode and Social Desirability in Measuring Behavior during Wartime

2024· preprint· en· W4390979986 on OpenAlexafffund
Aaron Erlich

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRepresentativeness heuristicSocial desirability biasProsocial behaviorTelephone surveySurvey data collectionPsychologyGeneral Social SurveySurvey methodologyPopulationMode (computer interface)Scale (ratio)Social psychologyWeb surveyPriming (agriculture)Survey researchSocial desirabilityDemographyGeographyApplied psychologyStatisticsMarketingComputer scienceSociologyBiologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring individuals' behavior from survey data during an active war raises distinct challenges. To investigate survey mode and social desirability effects, we conduct a multi-mode study (opt-in web, RDD telephone) with two independently drawn samples of the Ukrainian population during Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in the summer of 2022. We employ identical demographic and behavioral questions in both surveys to investigate cross-mode reliability. We also embed a pre-registered priming experiment to examine whether respondents may inflate prosocial behavior. Observationally, we find that because web studies cannot reach the oldest Ukrainians, they likely contain significant population bias with respect to war-related demographic variables. Experimentally, we find evidence of inflation in reporting volunteering activities only in the telephone survey. Our findings demonstrate that, given modern survey techniques, wartime attitudes and behavior can be reliably measured, but there is a trade-off in survey modes between representativeness and response bias. The manuscript contributes to our knowledge about measuring behavior and survey methods.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.122
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.244
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1220.244
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.175
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial and Intergroup Psychology→French-language works237,207→