戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 FACT subscales and mood, social support, and social desirability.
2 pant response between V-CASI and FTFI toward social desirability.
3 pression was authentic, not merely driven by social desirability.
4 nnoyance with being excluded by women low on social desirability.
5 gical or genetic vulnerabilities rather than social desirability.
6 purpose of this investigation was to examine social desirability and social approval as sources of er
7 results from the present study indicate that social desirability and social approval biases appear to
8                    The authors conclude that social desirability and social approval may influence se
9          Measures of the personality traits "social desirability" and "social approval" were regresse
10  body mass index, and greater fat-free mass, social desirability, and dissatisfaction with perceived
11              The V-CASI technique can reduce social desirability bias and improve validity in researc
12                The main study limitation was social desirability bias for self-reported sexual behavi
13 ting similar friends, and low prevalence and social desirability bias might have masked associations.
14                                  We assessed social desirability bias using two items from the Marlow
15 esponses may have been subject to recall and social desirability bias, and (3) patients or clients of
16  of sociodemographic and clinical variables, social desirability bias, and general adherence to medic
17 elf-reported outcomes that may be subject to social desirability bias, and low statistical power for
18 n secondary report by ART clients, potential social desirability bias, and not powered for sex disagg
19 participants' responses may be influenced by social desirability bias, leading them to provide social
20 primary outcome introduces the potential for social desirability bias, particularly in the absence of
21  susceptibility of self-reported drinking to social desirability bias, the modest participation rates
22 that our results are not due to differential social desirability bias.
23 y evaluated with self-report, susceptible to social desirability bias.
24 isks of the task in question, and addressing social desirability bias.
25 t the findings might have been influenced by social desirability bias.
26 dent with the EVD period, recall errors, and social desirability bias.
27 ate impression formation is difficult due to social desirability concerns.
28 rs of underreporting in women (R(2) = 0.22); social desirability, dietary restraint, body mass index,
29                          In the 24HR models, social desirability, fear of negative evaluation, body m
30 r association with symptom, personality, and social desirability measures.
31 n the 7DDR relative to the 24HR according to social desirability: One unit increase in the social des
32 ended upward with younger age (P = 0.07) and social desirability (P = 0.09) but was not associated wi
33 t error thought to have been attributable to social desirability response bias now appears to be due
34 s a weak negative correlation between HF and social desirability response tendency (r(345) = - 0.24),
35 ocial desirability: One unit increase in the social desirability score was associated with an underes
36                                              Social desirability (the tendency to respond in such a w
37                                              Social desirability was associated with overreporting of
38 ing patterns, and caregiver demographics and social desirability were evaluated as correlates of repo