Public opinion surveys often use scales marked with terms such as ‘‘strongly agree,’’ ‘‘agree,’’ ‘‘disagree,’’ and ‘‘strongly disagree.’’ Two sets of systematic factors may influence answers to such items. First, responses may reflect the substantive concept of interest. It is hoped that if we ask for opinion on a new education proposal, answers will tell us something meaningful about assessments of that policy. Second, answers may reflect a respondent’s general approach to survey questions. This article focuses on two such response tendencies: extreme response style (ERS) and acquiescence response style (ARS). The first refers to the extent to which individuals gravitate toward the most extreme response options on a polychotomous scale, and the second denotes a tendency to approve of ideas presented during a survey. Response styles such as these mean that survey data often capture something extraneous to the substantive concept of interest. Scholars have long recognized that response tendencies threaten the validity of inferences derived from survey data (Cronbach, 1946, 1950). Considerable effort has been devoted to identify response sets and understand their correlates. This research note focuses on the latter task by examining links between personality traits and response tendencies. Psychologists measure personality with various trait

中文翻译：

---

民意调查中人格与反应模式的关系：大五型、极端反应方式和默许反应方式

民意调查通常使用标有“非常同意”、“同意”、“不同意”和“非常不同意”等术语的量表。两组系统因素可能会影响对这些项目的回答。首先，回应可能反映了利益的实质概念。希望如果我们就一项新的教育提案征求意见，答案将告诉我们有关该政策评估的一些有意义的信息。其次，答案可能反映了受访者对调查问题的一般方法。本文重点介绍两种这样的反应倾向：极端反应风格（ERS）和默认反应风格（ARS）。第一个是指个人倾向于在多分尺度上最极端的反应选项的程度，第二个表示赞成调查期间提出的想法的倾向。诸如此类的响应方式意味着调查数据通常会捕获与感兴趣的实质性概念无关的内容。学者们早就认识到，反应倾向威胁着从调查数据中得出的推论的有效性（Cronbach, 1946, 1950）。已经付出了相当大的努力来识别响应集并了解它们的相关性。本研究笔记通过检查人格特征和反应倾向之间的联系来关注后一项任务。心理学家用各种特质来衡量人格 已经付出了相当大的努力来识别响应集并了解它们的相关性。本研究笔记通过检查人格特征和反应倾向之间的联系来关注后一项任务。心理学家用各种特质来衡量人格 已经付出了相当大的努力来识别响应集并了解它们的相关性。本研究笔记通过检查人格特征和反应倾向之间的联系来关注后一项任务。心理学家用各种特质来衡量人格