Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding Version 6

Abstract

The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding Version 6 (BIDR 6) is a widely utilized psychometric instrument designed to measure individual differences in the tendency to respond in a socially desirable manner. Developed by Delroy L. Paulhus in 1994, the BIDR 6 operationalizes desirable responding as a multifaceted construct, distinguishing between conscious manipulation of responses (Impression Management) and honest, but overly positive, self-perceptions (Self-Deceptive Enhancement). This 40-item scale is critical for researchers seeking to control for potential response biases in self-report measures of personality and attitudes.

Keywords

Social desirability, desirable responding, Self-Deceptive Enhancement, Impression Management, response bias, personality assessment, psychometrics.

Authors

Delroy L. Paulhus, D. B. Reid.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the BIDR 6 is to quantify the degree to which respondents distort their answers on personality or attitude questionnaires, thereby isolating and controlling for potential bias. It serves as a crucial tool in research settings where the validity of self-report measures might be compromised by individuals presenting themselves favorably.

By splitting desirable responding into two distinct components, the BIDR allows researchers to determine whether the bias stems from deliberate manipulation aimed at external audiences (Impression Management) or from genuinely believing in one’s own positive, yet potentially exaggerated, self-view (Self-Deceptive Enhancement).

Construct

The BIDR 6 measures the overarching construct of Desirable Responding (DR), conceptualized by Paulhus as having two empirically and theoretically distinct factors:

• Self-Deceptive Enhancement (SDE): This factor reflects an honest, but positively biased, tendency to see oneself as exceptionally competent, intelligent, stable, and well-adjusted. Individuals scoring high on SDE genuinely believe their inflated self-descriptions, suggesting an unconscious cognitive bias rather than intentional deception.
• Impression Management (IM): This factor reflects conscious, intentional efforts to present oneself favorably to others, often by exaggerating good behaviors (e.g., never speeding) and denying minor faults or socially undesirable actions (e.g., never telling a lie). This is typically viewed as a situational response strategy aimed at maximizing social approval.

The scale is structured with 20 items dedicated to measuring SDE and 20 items dedicated to measuring IM, resulting in a total of 40 items. The orthogonality of these two dimensions is a defining feature of the BIDR model.

Validity

The validity of the BIDR 6 is supported by extensive research demonstrating its capacity to differentiate between cognitive and motivational forms of bias. Early research by Paulhus established strong discriminant and construct validity. The SDE subscale consistently shows correlations with measures of narcissism, ego strength, and high self-esteem, confirming its role as a measure of overly positive, yet non-cynical, self-perception.

Conversely, the IM subscale exhibits expected correlations with measures of public self-consciousness and traditional lie scales, confirming its role in measuring conscious attempts at self-presentation. The demonstration that SDE and IM are statistically independent reinforces the scale’s utility in providing a nuanced assessment of response bias, allowing researchers to adjust for the specific type of desirable responding observed.

Reliability

The reliability of the BIDR 6 subscales is generally robust. Internal consistency, measured using Cronbach’s alpha, typically ranges between 0.75 and 0.86 for both the SDE and IM subscales across diverse populations, indicating acceptable to good homogeneity within each factor.

Test-retest reliability tends to be higher for the SDE component, which reflects a more stable, trait-like characteristic of personality. The IM component, being more sensitive to situational demands and context, shows slightly lower but still acceptable stability over short periods. These reliability figures support the use of the BIDR 6 as a consistent measure of its intended constructs.

Factor Analysis

The structural integrity of the BIDR 6 is consistently confirmed through factor analysis. Both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) reliably extract a two-factor solution that aligns perfectly with the theoretical framework proposed by Paulhus: Self-Deceptive Enhancement and Impression Management.

This robust bi-factorial structure confirms that the 40 items load distinctly and strongly onto the two hypothesized constructs, thereby providing empirical evidence for the conceptual separation of self-deception and deliberate impression management in the measurement of desirable responding.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire / Personality inventory

Format: 40 items scored on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (NOT TRUE) to 7 (VERY TRUE).

Language Available: Primarily English, with extensive translations available for global research applications.

Population Group: General population, students, and clinical samples.

Age Group: Adolescents (typically 16 years and older) and Adults.

Population Details: Suitable for use in diverse research contexts requiring the measurement or statistical control of response bias in self-report data.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate their agreement with statements. Scoring involves summing the values for 20 SDE items (with 10 reversed) and 20 IM items (with 10 reversed). While continuous scoring (0-7 scale) is standard, dichotomous scoring (assigning 1 point if the respondent chooses 6 or 7) is also sometimes employed, though continuous scoring often yields better psychometric results (Stober, Dette, & Musch, 2002).

Keywords

Social desirability, SDE, IM, personality measurement, psychological assessment, response bias, psychometrics.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Information not provided in source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Information not provided in source material.

Correspondence Address: Delroy L. Paulhus, Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The BIDR Version 6 was published in 1994, succeeding earlier versions. It is generally available for use by academic researchers and students, often free of charge, provided that proper academic citation is included in all resulting publications. The scale is frequently reproduced in dissertations and research manuals.

The original instrument and related scoring details are available in various academic sources. The instrument can be found on pages 41-42 of Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Interpersonal Sexual Objectification Scale. The original PDF can be downloaded here: https://kb.osu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/1811/414/1/angeladenchik.pdf. Further documentation is available at: www.sjdm.org/dmidi/files/Paulhus_(1991)_BIDR.doc and http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE0022157/brewster_m.pdf.

Reference’s

The following references document the development, psychometric properties, and application of the BIDR and related desirable responding constructs:

• Paulhus, D. L. (1994). Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding reference manual for BIDR Version 6. Vancouver, British Columbia, University of British Columbia.
• Paulhus, D. L., & Reid, D. B. (1991). Enhancement and denial in socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 307-317.
• Paulhus, D.L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J.P. Robinson, P.R. Shaver, & L.S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp.17-59). San Diego: Academic Press.
• Paulhus, D.L., Bruce, M.N., & Trapnell, P.D. (1995). Effects of self-presentation strategies on personality profiles and their structure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 100-108.
• Stober, J, Dette, D.E., & Musch, J. (2002). Comparing continuous and dichotomous scoring of the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding. Journal of Personality Assessment, 78, 370-389.
• Denchik. Angela L. (2005). Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Interpersonal Sexual Objectification Scale. Ohio State University.

Items of the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding Version 6

Scoring Key: The scale uses a 7-point Likert scale (1 = NOT TRUE to 7 = VERY TRUE).

Self-Deceptive Enhancement (SDE): Items 1 – 20

• Reverse scored items: 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20.

Impression Management (IM): Items 21 – 40

• Reverse scored items: 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35, 37, 39.

Self-Deceptive Enhancement subscale

1. My first impressions of people usually turn out to be right.
2. It would be hard for me to break any of my bad habits.
3. I don’t care to know what other people really think of me.
4. I have not always been honest with myself.
5. I always know why I like things.
6. When my emotions are aroused, it biases my thinking.
7. Once I’ve made up my mind other people can seldom change my opinion.
8. I am not a safe driver when I exceed the speed limit.
9. I am fully in control of my own fate.
10. It’s hard for me to shut off a disturbing thought.
11. I never regret my decisions.
12. I sometimes lose out on things because I can’t make up my mind soon enough.
13. The reason I vote is because my vote can make a difference.
14. My parents were not always fair when they punished me.
15. I am a completely rational person.
16. I rarely appreciate criticism.
17. I am very confident of my judgments.
18. I have sometimes doubted my ability as a lover.
19. It’s all right with me if some people happen to dislike me.
20. I don’t always know the reasons why I do the things I do.

Impression Management subscale

21. I sometimes tell lies if I have to.
22. I never cover up my mistakes.
23. There have been occasions when I have taken advantage of someone.
24. I never swear.
25. I sometimes try to get even rather than forgive and forget.
26. I always obey laws, even if I’m unlikely to get caught.
27. I have said something bad about a friend behind his or her back.
28. When I hear people talking privately, I avoid listening.
29. I have received too much change from a salesperson without telling him or her.
30. I always declare everything at customs.
31. When I was young I sometimes stole things.
32. I have never dropped litter on the street.
33. I sometimes drive faster than the speed limit.
34. I never read sexy books or magazines.
35. I have done things that I don’t tell other people about.
36. I never take things that don’t belong to me.
37. I have taken sick-leave from work or school even though I wasn’t really sick.
38. I have never damaged a library book or store merchandise without reporting it.
39. I have some pretty awful habits.
40. I don’t gossip about other people’s business.