These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27120562)

  • 1. A Strong Validation of the Crosswise Model Using Experimentally-Induced Cheating Behavior.
    Hoffmann A; Diedenhofen B; Verschuere B; Musch J
    Exp Psychol; 2015; 62(6):403-14. PubMed ID: 27120562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Nothing but the truth? Effects of faking on the validity of the crosswise model.
    Hoffmann A; Meisters J; Musch J
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(10):e0258603. PubMed ID: 34714838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. More is not always better: An experimental individual-level validation of the randomized response technique and the crosswise model.
    Höglinger M; Jann B
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(8):e0201770. PubMed ID: 30106973
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. More than random responding: Empirical evidence for the validity of the (Extended) Crosswise Model.
    Meisters J; Hoffmann A; Musch J
    Behav Res Methods; 2023 Feb; 55(2):716-729. PubMed ID: 35449499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Assessing the validity of two indirect questioning techniques: A Stochastic Lie Detector versus the Crosswise Model.
    Hoffmann A; Musch J
    Behav Res Methods; 2016 Sep; 48(3):1032-46. PubMed ID: 26182857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. On the validity of non-randomized response techniques: an experimental comparison of the crosswise model and the triangular model.
    Hoffmann A; Meisters J; Musch J
    Behav Res Methods; 2020 Aug; 52(4):1768-1782. PubMed ID: 32185638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Controlling social desirability bias: An experimental investigation of the extended crosswise model.
    Meisters J; Hoffmann A; Musch J
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(12):e0243384. PubMed ID: 33284820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Do they really wash their hands? Prevalence estimates for personal hygiene behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic based on indirect questions.
    Mieth L; Mayer MM; Hoffmann A; Buchner A; Bell R
    BMC Public Health; 2021 Jan; 21(1):12. PubMed ID: 33397344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. An experimental validation method for questioning techniques that assess sensitive issues.
    Moshagen M; Hilbig BE; Erdfelder E; Moritz A
    Exp Psychol; 2014 Jan; 61(1):48-54. PubMed ID: 23948389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. PageFocus: Using paradata to detect and prevent cheating on online achievement tests.
    Diedenhofen B; Musch J
    Behav Res Methods; 2017 Aug; 49(4):1444-1459. PubMed ID: 27573006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Can detailed instructions and comprehension checks increase the validity of crosswise model estimates?
    Meisters J; Hoffmann A; Musch J
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(6):e0235403. PubMed ID: 32603352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Questions on honest responding.
    Vésteinsdóttir V; Joinson A; Reips UD; Danielsdottir HB; Thorarinsdottir EA; Thorsdottir F
    Behav Res Methods; 2019 Apr; 51(2):811-825. PubMed ID: 30565012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Social desirability and self-reports: testing models of socially desirable responding.
    Holtgraves T
    Pers Soc Psychol Bull; 2004 Feb; 30(2):161-72. PubMed ID: 15030631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. How selfish is memory for cheaters? Evidence for moral and egoistic biases.
    Bell R; Schain C; Echterhoff G
    Cognition; 2014 Sep; 132(3):437-42. PubMed ID: 24908343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reducing socially desirable responses in epidemiologic surveys: an extension of the randomized-response technique.
    Moshagen M; Musch J; Ostapczuk M; Zhao Z
    Epidemiology; 2010 May; 21(3):379-82. PubMed ID: 20386172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Kin selection-mutation balance: a model for the origin, maintenance, and consequences of social cheating.
    Van Dyken JD; Linksvayer TA; Wade MJ
    Am Nat; 2011 Mar; 177(3):288-300. PubMed ID: 21460538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The Difference Spotting Task: A new nonverbal measure of cheating behavior.
    Liu J; Shen Q; Zhang J; Beyens U; Cai W; Decety J; Li H
    Behav Res Methods; 2021 Oct; 53(5):1935-1944. PubMed ID: 33694078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Cheating on Unproctored Internet Test Applications: An Analysis of a Verification Test in a Real Personnel Selection Context.
    Aguado D; Vidal A; Olea J; Ponsoda V; Barrada JR; Abad FJ
    Span J Psychol; 2018 Dec; 21():E62. PubMed ID: 30501646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Academic cheating interferes with learning among middle school children.
    Zhao L; Peng J; Dong LD; Compton BJ; Zhong Z; Li Y; Mao H; Ye J; Heyman GD; Lee K
    J Exp Child Psychol; 2023 Feb; 226():105566. PubMed ID: 36240697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. When cheating would make you a cheater: implicating the self prevents unethical behavior.
    Bryan CJ; Adams GS; Monin B
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2013 Nov; 142(4):1001-5. PubMed ID: 23127418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.