The Interview Mode Effect on the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale

An Item Response Theory Analysis

Published in: Medical Care, v. 42, no. 3, Mar. 2004, p. 281-289

Posted on on January 01, 2004

by Kitty S. Chan, Maria Orlando Edelen, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, Naihua Duan, Cathy D. Sherbourne

Read More

Access further information on this document at

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

BACKGROUND: Evidence of a mode effect has raised concerns about the comparability and validity of self- versus interviewer-administered versions of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) scale. Response anonymity has been proposed to explain this effect. However, the factors that contribute to this mode effect are not well understood. The authors used item response theory (IRT) to examine the nature of the CES-D mode effect. METHODS: A sample of depressed primary care patients from the Partners-in-Care Study were randomized to receive either a phone interview (N = 139) or a mail survey (N = 139) of the CES-D. They used likelihood ratio tests to identify differentially functioning items in the 2 groups. Category response curves are used to describe these effects. RESULTS: Twelve items manifested differential functioning. Category response curves consistently indicate that phone respondents had a lower probability of endorsing the third of 4 response categories than mail respondents, suggesting a possible cognitive effect. CONCLUSION: Although response anonymity could be important in mode effects observed in surveys of sensitive topics, cognitive factors appear more important to the mode effect in the CES-D.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.