The Effect of Rapport on Data Quality in Face-to-Face Interviews: Beneficial or Detrimental?

The benefits of rapport between interviewers and respondents, in terms of recruiting the latter and motiving them to participate in research, have been generally endorsed. However, there has been less clarity with regard to the association between rapport and data quality. In theory, rapport could be beneficial if it motivates people to give complete and honest responses. On the other hand, efforts to maintain rapport by exhibiting pleasing and socially desirable behaviour could well be detrimental to data quality. In a large longitudinal epidemiological sample, generalized estimating equations (GEE) analyses were used to examine the association between rapport and the following three quality indicators: missing responses, responses to sensitive questions, and consistency of responses. The results of these analyses indicate an association between a high level of rapport and fewer missing responses. In contrast, we found more socially desirable responses for the high-rapport group. Finally, the high-rapport group did not differ from the low-rapport group in terms of the consistency of their responses.

Predictors of Psychosomatic Health during the first COVID-19 Outbreak in Greece. A Multiple Linear Regression Analysis in an Epidemiological Sample of 1,156 Individuals

Background: Between March 23 and May 4, 2020, the Greek government established an economic and social ‘lockdown’ to prevent the spread of COVID-19. It was hypothesized that the unsafe environment activated the stress response of the Greeks during that time, while existing literature supports the development of psychosomatic disorders. Aim: The research question is whether six biopsychosocial variables predict psychosomatic symptoms of the Greek general population during the ‘lockdown’. Methods & Materials: A convenient sample of 1,158 -of whom 2 were excluded from the final analysis- Greeks participated electronically during the ‘lockdown’. Pearson’s r and a linear-multiple regression analyses were chosen to test the hypothesis. The participants answered a series of demographic questions, while the rest variables were measured through the following self-reported psychometric tools: ‘psychosomatics’ [PSSQ-29], ‘acute stress’ [ASDS], ‘psychological resilience’ [NMRQ], and ‘satisfaction with life’ [SWLS]. Results: Between the significant predictors, the first to appear is ‘acute stress’ (β= .66, p< .001), while ‘psychological resilience’ (β= .21, p< .001), ‘satisfaction with life’ (β= .06, p= .001) and ‘age’ (β= .04, p= .025) follow hierarchically. Discussion: The findings are consistent to the background literature and previous relevant COVID-19 studies, with the exception of the findings regarding ‘gender’ -which was not found significant in the weightings-. Conclusion: The model predicts the criterion with a large effect. The study is overall confirmatory to previous COVID-19 research regarding domestic general population, while the need for European studies that would include positive components on psychosomatic health is highlighted. Key words: Psychosomatic Health; COVID-19; Greece; Acute Stress Disorder; Psychological Resilience

Introducing the Greek adaptation of acute stress disorder scale’ (ASDS). High reliabil-ity and validity in an epidemiological sample

Background: Acute stress disorder is a common and profound psychological condition. It concerns the physiological activation of the neuroendocrinological bodily response against any stressors within minutes of exposure to the stimuli, and under some particular criteria until the end of the first month.Aim: The present study is conducted with the view of providing a new, culturally adapted, self-reported measure of acute stress in the Greek population. Material & Methods: A variety of methods and analysis were employed and performed accordingly, in order to translate the original English questionnaire and to test the new Greek version for its reliability and validity in a Greek sample (N= 1,158).Results: The most important findings conclude a high validity of the Greek version (α= .925) and a strong correlation with resilience and psychosomatic symptoms. Conclusion: It is highly recommended for future studies concerning the Greek population to adapt and test-retest the questionnaire, as well as for practitioners to use the Greek version of ASDS in clinical and private practice.

The Psychometric Properties of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) in an Epidemiological Sample of Canadian Youth

Objective: This study (1) describes the distribution of Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) scores in an epidemiological sample of youth, (2) reports its item correlations and internal consistency reliability, (3) tests for measurement invariance by age (youth vs. adults) and sex, and (4) examines its predictive power for past-year psychiatric disorders. Method: Youth aged 15 to 19 years ( n = 2010) and adults aged 20 to 64 years ( n = 2010) from the Canadian Community Health Survey–Mental Health who completed the K6 were included. Past-year psychiatric disorders were measured using the World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0 (WHO-CIDI). Polychoric correlation matrices and ordinal reliability coefficients were calculated to assess internal consistency of the K6, and confirmatory factor analysis was used to test for measurement invariance. Area under the curves (AUCs) were computed to determine the extent to which the K6 predicted a positive screen on the WHO-CIDI. Results: K6 scores showed a J-shaped distribution, with >50% of youth having scores ≤3. Item and total scores were higher for females versus males. Item correlations were robust (0.31-0.78) and internal consistency was high (α = 0.86). Full measurement invariance was demonstrated between youth and adults, as well as between male and female youth. The K6 was a strong predictor of major depressive episode (AUC = 0.848), generalized anxiety disorder (AUC = 0.847), and bipolar disorder (AUC = 0.853). Conclusions: The K6 is a valid and reliable measure of psychological distress among youth. Its brevity and robust predictive power for psychiatric disorder confirm its utility in clinical and community settings to identify youth needing comprehensive psychiatric assessment.