Does response scale format affect the answering of personality scales?: Assessing the big five dimensions of personality with different response scales in a dependent sample

European Journal of Psychological Assessment

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 32-38

  Rammstedt, Beatrice ^a   Krebs, Dagmar ^b  

^a GESIS LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE FOR THE SOCIAL SCIENCES   (Germany)

^b JUSTUS LIEBIG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Big Five; Personality questionnaires; Response behavior; Response scales

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846513927     PISSN: 10155759     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759.23.1.32     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Zentralarchiv für empirische Sozialforschung. (Ed.). Allgemeine Bevölkerungsumfrage der Sozialwissenschaften ALLBUS, 1998: Codebook (ZA-Nr. 3000) [German General Social Sur vey ALLBUS, 1998: Codebook (ZA-No. 3000)]. Cologne: Zentralarchiv für empirische Sozialforschung.
2. Halman, L. (2001). The European Value Study: A third wave. Source book of the 1999/2000 European Value Study surveys, Tilburg, NL: WORC, Tilburg University.
3. ISSP source questionnaire, 2004 [electronic data file] (2004). International Social Survey Programme. Retrieved in April 2006 from http://www.issp.org/Documents/issp2004.pdf
4. John, O.P., Donahue, E.M., & Kentle, R.L. (1991). The Big Five Inventory - Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research.
5. Menon, G., Raghubir, P., & Schwarz, N. (1995). Behavioral frequency judgments: An accessibility-diagnosticity framework. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 212-228.
6. O'Muircheartaigh, C., Krosnick, J., & Helic, A. (1998). Middle alternatives, acquiescence, and the quality of questionnaire data. Unpublished NORC report.
7. Poulton, E.C. (1989). Bias in quantifying judgments. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Rammstedt, B. (1997). Die deutsche Version des Big Five Inventory (BFI): Übersetzung und Validierung eines Fragebogens zur Erfassung des Fünf-Faktoren-Modells der Persönlichkeit. [The German version of the Big Five Inventory (BFI): Translation and validation of a questionnaire assessing the Five Factor Model of personality]. Unpublished diploma thesis, University of Bielefeld, Germany.
9. Rammstedt, B., & John, O.P. (in press). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality.
10. Rammstedt, B., & John, O.P. (2006). Die grossen Fünf: Nomological net and cultural differences in the U.S. and Germany. Manuscript in preparation.
11. Scherpenzeel, A., & Saris, W.E. (1997). The validity and reliability of survey questions: A meta-analysis of MTMM studies. Sociological Methods and Research, 25, 341-383.
12. Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers in attitude survey: Experiments on question form, wording, and context. New York: Academic Press.
13. Schwarz, N., & Hippler, H. (1995). The numeric values of rating scales: A comparison of their impact in mail surveys and telephone interviews. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 7, 72-74.
14. Schwarz, N., & Hippler, H. (1991). Response alternatives: The impact of their choice and presentation order. In P. Biemer, R. Groves, L. Lyberg, N. Mathiowetz, & S. Sudman (Eds.), Measurement errors in surveys. New York: Wiley.
15. Schwarz, N., & Scheuring, B. (1988): Judgments of relationship satisfaction: Inter- and intraindividual comparisons as a function of questionnaire structure. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 485-496.
16. Schwarz, N., & Scheuring, B. (1992). Selbstberichtete Verhaltensund Symptomhäufigkeiten: Was Befragte aus Antwortvorgaben des Fragebogens lernen [Frequency reports of psychosomatic symptoms: What respondents learn from response alternatives.] Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, 22, 197-208.
17. Schwarz, N. (1999). Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist 54, 93-105.
18. Schwarz, N., Grayson, C., & Knäuper, B. (1998). Formal features of rating scales and the interpretation of meaning. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 10, 177-183.
19. Schwarz, N., Hippler, H.J., Deutsch, B., & Strack, F. (1985). Response scales: Effects of category range on reported behavior and subsequent judgments. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49, 388-395.
20. Schwarz, N., Knäuper, B., Hippler, H.J., Noelle-Neumann, E., & Clark F. (1991). Rating scales: Numeric values may change the meaning of scale labels. Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 570-582.
21. Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Müller, G., & Chassein, B. (1988). The range of response alternatives may determine the meaning of the question: Further evidence on informative functions of response alternatives. Social Cognition, 6, 107-117.
22. Sheskin, DJ. (2000). Handbook of parametric and nonparamet ric statistical procedures. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
23. Tourangeau, R., & Smith, T. (1996). Asking sensitive questions: The impact of data collection, question format, and question context. Public Opinion Quarterly, 60, 275-304.