Why we need response shift: an appeal to functionalism

The series of articles and commentaries in the May issue of Quality of Life Research [1‐5] on the utility of the response shift construct may help define a path for further advancements in this line of research. While differences of opinion exist, there also seems to be agreement on several key points. First, there appears to be at least some conceptual confusion surrounding response shift that is in need of resolution. Second, the term response shift is frequently misused to account for anomalous findings—a sort of “catch-all” receptacle for scientific findings that are difficult to explain. And third, a more emphatic clarification is needed that response shift is more than just recalibration. Certainly, all of these issues merit attention. But will abandoning the term response shift, as Ubel and colleagues suggest [2], move our field forward? I believe that it won’t. …