As indicated by previous research, the social desirability bias gives rise to the possibility of under-reporting.
The latter made it possible to identify those policy/research items with a gap between their degree of perceived implementation (current policy/research rankings) and degree of desirability (desired policy/research rankings).
Post intervention measures were administered by another researcher, independent of the research team, to minimise social desirability bias.
While research indicates that social desirability of responses may be facilitated by the ACASI, there is significant variance in an individual's perception of sexual experiences that meet criteria as sexual abuse [ 65].
Previous research suggests that social desirability bias is more likely to occur when questions relate to sensitive topics such as sexuality, drug use and risk taking behavior; topics that are included in the CRIS [ 16].
An increasing body of research suggests that establishing product desirability is largely a matter of first impression.
One of the more important debates concerning objectivity in the social sciences concerns the role value judgments play and, importantly, whether value-laden research entails claims about the desirability of actions.
The study identified ten main types of limitation in these practices reported in the literature: sample characteristic limitations, methodological limitations, psychometric limitations, qualitative research limitations, missing data, social desirability bias, item limitations, brevity of the scale, difficulty controlling all variables, and lack of manual instructions.
Some research also concluded that social desirability scores may be higher in collectivistic societies [ 62].
CAB members may however be influenced by social desirability, particularly when research team members are actively engaged in the CAB.
