Bogus / Infrequent Items (Careless Responding)
HR & WorkReliability: method-level3 sample items
About this scale
A method approach: include items with a single 'correct' response (e.g., 'I have eaten a meal in the past year') to identify careless or random responders. Failed bogus items signal data quality issues.
Sample item(s)
“I have eaten a meal in the past year (correct: agree)”
“I have visited the planet Mars (correct: disagree)”
“I am paid in chocolate at work (correct: disagree)”
Reliability
Reported internal consistency: method-level. As a rule of thumb, Cronbach’s α ≥ .70 is considered acceptable, ≥ .80 good, and ≥ .90 excellent for established measures.
Notes
Standard data-quality method.
Source & citation
Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012): Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 437–455.
Source. Scale details are summarised from the publication cited above. Always consult the original source for the full item set, scoring, and permission to use.
Use it in your research
Need to check the reliability or psychometrics of this scale in your own data? Use the free DrAIStudio research tools:
Cronbach’s alpha calculator
All statistical calculators
Search the full Scale Atlas
Academic writing humanizer