The retrospective pretest–posttest design redux: On its validity as an alternative to traditional pretest–posttest measurement

We revisit the merits of the retrospective pretest–posttest (RPP) design for repeated-measures research. The underutilized RPP method asks respondents to rate survey items twice during the same posttest measurement occasion from two specific frames of reference: “now” and “then.” Individuals first r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of behavioral development 2020-03, Vol.44 (2), p.175-183
Main Authors: Little, Todd D., Chang, Rong, Gorrall, Britt K., Waggenspack, Luke, Fukuda, Eriko, Allen, Patricia J., Noam, Gil G.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accuracy
Alternative Assessment
Evaluation Methods
Intervention
Measurement
Plague
Pretesting
Pretests Posttests
Program Evaluation
Research Problems
Response Style (Tests)
Scores
Test Construction
Test Reliability
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We revisit the merits of the retrospective pretest–posttest (RPP) design for repeated-measures research. The underutilized RPP method asks respondents to rate survey items twice during the same posttest measurement occasion from two specific frames of reference: “now” and “then.” Individuals first report their current attitudes or beliefs following a given intervention, and next they are prompted to think back to a specific time prior to the given intervention and rate the item again retrospectively. The design addresses many of the validity concerns that plague the traditional pretest–posttest design. Particularly when measuring noncognitive constructs, the RPP design allows participants to gauge the degree of change that they experience with greater awareness and precision than a traditional approach. We review the undesirable features of traditional designs and highlight the benefits of the retrospective approach. We offer examples from two recent, original studies and conclude with the recommendation that the RPP design be employed more broadly. We also conclude with a discussion of important directions for future examination of this design.
ISSN:0165-0254
1464-0651
DOI:10.1177/0165025419877973