The meanings of 'yes' and 'no'. An explanation for the forbid/allow asymmetry

Quality and Quantity

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 1-38

  Holleman, B C ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Interval scales; Nominal answering scales; Question wording effect; Question answering process; Questionnaire development; Reliability; Split ballot design; Survey research; Validity

Indexed keywords

EID: 29344455121     PISSN: 00335177     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11135-005-4479-6     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Billiet, J. (1989). Wat te doen? Beschouwingen over het nut van pasklare voorschriften voor het ontwerpen van survey-vragen [What to do? Reflections on the use of ready-made advice on the design of survey questions]. In: J. Van der Zouwen and W. Dijkstra (eds.), Sociaal wetenschappelijk onderzoek met vragenlijsten. Methoden, knelpunten, oplossingen. Amsterdam: VU-Uitgeverij, pp. 35-52.
2. Bishop, G. F., Hippler, H.-J., Schwarz, N. & Strack, F. (1988). A comparison of response effects in self-administered and telephone surveys. In: R. M. Groves, P. Biemer, L. Lyberg, J. Massey, W. Nicholls J. Waksberg (eds.), Telephone Survey Methodology. New York: Wiley, pp. 273-282.
3. Cicourel, A. V. (1982). Interviews, surveys and the problem of ecological validity. The American Sociologist 17: 11-20.
4. Hippler, H.-J. & Schwarz, N. (1986). Not forbidding isn't allowing: The cognitive basis of the forbid/allow asymmetry. Public Opinion Quarterly 50: 87-96.
5. Holleman, B. C. (1999a). Wording effects in survey research. Using meta-anlaysis to explain the forbid/allow asymmetry. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 6: 29-40.
6. Holleman, B. C. (1999b). The nature of the forbid/allow asymmetry. Two correlational studies. Sociological Methods & Research 28/2:209-244.
7. Holleman, B. C. (2000). The Forbid/Allow Asymmetry. On the Cognitive Mechanisms Underlying Wording Effects in Surveys. Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi.
8. Houtkoop, H. & van den Bergh, H. (2000). Effects of introductions in large-scale telephone survey interviews. Sociological Methods & Research 28/3: 281-300.
9. Jobe, J. B. & Mingay, D. J. (1991). Cognition and survey measurement: History and overview. Applied Cognitive Psychology 5/1: 175-192.
10. Jöreskog, K. G. (1971). Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests. Psychometrika 36: 109-133.
11. Krosnick, J. A. & Schuman, H. (1988). Attitude intensity, importance, and certainty and susceptibility to response effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54/6: 940-952.
12. Molenaar, N. (1982). Response effects of "formal" characteristics of questions. In: W. Dijkstra and J. Van der Zouwen (eds.), Response Behaviour in the Survey Interview. London: Academic Press, pp. 49-89.
13. Reuband, K.-H. (2000). "Erlauben" vs. "nicht erlauben" oder "verbieten"? wie sich unterschiedliche Frage-Alternatieve auf das Antwortverhalten auswirken. ZUMA-Information 48: 42-55.
14. Rugg, D. (1941). Experiments in wording questions II. Public Opinion Quarterly 5: 91-92.
15. Schuman, H. & Presser, S. (1981/1996). Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys. Experiments on Question Form, Wording, and Context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications (Originally published in New York: Academic Press).
16. Sudman, S., Bradburn, N. M. & Schwarz, N. (1996). Thinking About Answers. The Application of Cognitive Processes to Survey Methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
17. Talmy, L. (1988). Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science 12: 49-100.
18. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J. & Rasinski, K. (2000). The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge University Press.
19. Tourangeau, R. & Rasinski, K. (1988). Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement. Psychological Bulletin 103: 299-314.
20. Waterplas, L., Billiet, J. & Loosveldt, G. (1988). De verbieden versus niet toelaten asymmetric. Een stabiel formuleringseffect in survey-onderzoek? [The forbid/allow asymmetry. A stable wording effect in survey research?] Mens en Maatschappij 63: 399-415.