{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01411589895988113, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.507246376811594, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Research Note: What If We're Wrong? Some Possible Implications of Systematic Distortions in Adolescents' Self-Reports of Sensitive Behaviors

Research in the social sciences is inherently plagued by the problem of biased or distorted self-reports of sensitive information. Participants in studies, when asked to provide truthful information about their own sensitive behaviors, might distort their responses because of self-presentation concerns or fear that their responses may not actually be completely anonymous or confidential. Researchers who study substance use and other problem behaviors must recognize the possibility that their findings may contain systematic distortions, must try to reduce such biases whenever possible, and must acknowledge them as limitations when little else can be done. This paper was written from the premise that systematic distortion is present in self-reports of substance use and other sensitive behaviors. We consider some of the most widely accepted theories and models from the fields of substance use and problem behavior from the perspective of this premise. Our purpose is not to suggest that these theories or findings are unfounded, but rather that the implications of systematic distortion for this field should be seriously considered when evaluating the validity of research findings and theory.