A number of researchers have observed that response biases, defined as when
subjects respond to items in research instruments in ways that do not coin
cide with the intent or content of the instrument, suffuse measurements and
assessments of mental disorders. They cautioned that the response bias pro
blem has been neglected in mental health research at the price of substanti
al error. Have the cautions been heeded? Or does the neglect of response bi
as continue? Articles published in 1998 in three major psychiatric journals
were examined: Archives of General Psychiatry, American Journal of Psychia
try, and the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. The articles were exami
ned to determine whether response biases were mentioned and whether systema
tic efforts were made to attend to their influence on the findings of the s
tudy. Each article was assessed twice by independent raters. The examinatio
n indicates that a very small minority of the articles reviewed mentioned r
esponse bias and that among those mentioning it, a minority attempted to co
ntrol for bias effects. Cautions offered about response bias have not been
heeded. Accordingly, the issue is one of how to incorporate concerns about
response bias into the institutional structures that influence the culture
of mental health research.