Reversed item bias: an integrative model

In the recent methodological literature, various models have been proposed to account for the phenomenon that reversed items (defined as items for which respondents' scores have to be recoded in order to make the direction of keying consistent across all items) tend to lead to problematic responses. In this article we propose an integrative conceptualization of three important sources of reversed item method bias (acquiescence, careless responding, and confirmation bias) and specify a multisample confirmatory factor analysis model with 2 method factors to empirically test the hypothesized mechanisms, using explicit measures of acquiescence and carelessness and experimentally manipulated versions of a questionnaire that varies 3 item arrangements and the keying direction of the first item measuring the focal construct. We explain the mechanisms, review prior attempts to model reversed item bias, present our new model, and apply it to responses to a 4-item self-esteem scale (N = 306) and the 6-item Revised Life Orientation Test (N = 595). Based on the literature review and the empirical results, we formulate recommendations on how to use reversed items in questionnaires

(R)E-tail satisfaction: retail customer satisfaction in online and offline contexts

Building on the e-Satisfaction model proposed by Szymanski and Hise (2000) and further validated by Evanschitzky, Iyer, Hesse, and Ahlert (2004), we develop an instrument to measure shopper satisfaction in online and offline retail contexts: the (R)E-Tail Satisfaction scale. Using data from an online (N=202) and an offline (N=441) grocery shopper sample, the instrument is shown to be fit for cross-channel evaluation of levels of satisfaction and its antecedents. We find full metric invariance (identical factor loadings), sufficient partial scalar invariance (identical item intercepts for at least two items per construct), as well as some interesting structural differences. Most notably, online shoppers evaluate the facets of retail satisfaction generally lower than do offline shoppers