Answering attitudinal questions: Modelling the response process underlying contrastive questions

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 203-225

  Chessa, Antonio G ^a,c   Holleman, Bregje C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c STATISTICS NETHERLANDS   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; COGNITION; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COMPUTER PROGRAM; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NORMAL HUMAN; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; QUESTIONNAIRE; REACTION TIME; RESPONSE TIME; VALIDATION PROCESS; VERBAL BEHAVIOR; VERBAL COMMUNICATION;

EID: 33947192982     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: 10990720     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acp.1337     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Abeles, M. (1991). Corticonics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Berkson, J.(1980). Minimum chi-square, not maximum likelihood! The Annals of Statistics, 8, 457-487.
3. Bishop, G. E, Hippler, H.-J., Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. (1988). A comparison of response effects in self-administered and telephone surveys. In R. M. Groves et al. (Eds.), Telephone survey methodology. New York: Wiley, 273-282.
4. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
5. Chessa, A. G. (1995). Conditional simulation ofspatial stochastic modelsfor reservoir heterogeneity. Delft, the Netherlands: Delft University Press.
6. Chessa, A. G., & Murre, J. M. J. (2001). A new memory model for ad impact and scheduling. Admap 36, 37-40.
7. Chessa, A. G., & Murre, J. M. J. (2004). A memory model for internet hits after media exposure. Physica A, 333, 541-552.
8. Chessa, A. G., & Muffe, J. M. J. (in press). A neurocognitive model of advertisement content and brand name recall. Marketing Science.
9. Clark, H. H., & Schober, M. F. (1992). Asking questions and influencing answers, what is to be done? In J. M. Tanur (Ed.), Questions about questions, inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys (pp. 15-48). New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
10. Daley, D. J., & Vere-Jones, D. (1988). An introduction to the theory of point processes. New York: Springer-Verlag, Inc.
11. Diggle, P. J. (1983). Statistical analysis of spatial point patterns. London: Academic Press.
12. Fazio, R. H. (1990). A practical guide to the use of response latency in social psychological research. In C. Hendrik, & M. S. Clark (Eds.), Research methods in personality and social psychology (pp. 74-97). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
13. Fazio, R. H. (1995). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences and correlates of attitude accessibility. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 247-282). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Hippler, H.-J., & Schwarz, N. (1986). Not forbidding isn't allowing: The cognitive basis of the forbid/allow asymmetry. In: POQ 50, 87-96.
15. Holleman, B. C. (1999a). The nature of the forbid/allow asymmetry: Two correlational studies. Sociological Methods & Research, 2812, 209-244.
16. Holleman, B. C. (1999b). Wording effects in survey research. Using meta-analysis to explain the forbid/allow asymmetry. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 6, 29-40.
17. Holleman, B. C. (2000). The forbid/allow asymmetry: On the cognitive mechanisms underlying wording effects in questions. Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi Publishers.
18. Holleman, B. C. (2005). Question wording effects and processes of question answering. A different way of measuring response latencies. In C. Dijkum, J. van Blasius, C. Durand (eds.), Recent developments and applications in social research methodology. Proceedings of the RC33 6th International Conference on Social Science Methodology, Amsterdam, August 17-20, 2004. CD-ROM Barbara Budrich Publishers. Amsterdam: Barbara Budrich Publishers. ISBN 3-908394-44-33.
19. Holleman, B. C. (2006). The meanings of 'yes' and 'no'. An explanation for the forbid/allow asymmetry. Quality & Quantity, 40, 1-38.
20. Houtkoop, H. (2000). Interaction and the standardized survey interview. The living questionnaire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Janssen, S. M. J., Chessa, A. G., & Murre, J. M. J. (2005). The reminiscence bump in autobiographical memory: effects of age, gender, education, and culture. Memory, 13, 658-668.
22. Krosnick, J. A., & Schuman, H. (1988). Attitude intensity, importance, and certainty, and susceptibility to response effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 940-952.
23. McGaugh, J. L. (2000). Memory - a century of consolidation. Science, 287, 248-251.
24. Murdock, B. B, Jr. (1974). Human memory: Theory and data. Potomac, MD: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
25. Murre, J. M. J., & Chessa, A. G. (2002). Learning and forgetting communicative messages. In G. C. Bartels, & W. J. A. Nelissen (Eds.), Marketingfor sustainability - Towards transactional policy-making (pp. 191-201). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.
26. Murre, J. M. J., Meeter, M., & Chessa, A. G. (in press). Modeling amnesia: connectionist and mathematical approaches. In M. J. Wenger, & C. Schuster (Eds.), Statistical and process models for neuroscience and aging. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Reuband, K.-H. (2000). "Erlauben" vs. "Nicht erlauben" oder "verbieten"? Wie sich unterschiedlichte Frage-Altemarieve auf das Antwortverhaltren auswirken. In ZA-Information 48. ZUMA: Mannheim.
28. Rugg, D. (1941). Experiments in wording questions II. Public Opinion Quarterly, 5, 91-92.
29. Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981/1996). Questions and answers in attitude surveys. Experiments on question form, wording and context. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
30. Stoyan, D., Kendall, W. S., & Mecke, J. (1987). Stochastic geometry and its applications. Berlin: John Wiley and Sons/Akademie Verlag.
31. Sudman, S., Bradburn, N. M., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Thinking about answers. The application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
32. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. C., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Waterplas, L., Billiet, J., & Loosveldt, G. (1988). De verbieden vs met toelaten asymmetric. Fen stabiel formuleringseffect in survey-onderzoek? Mens en Maatschappij, 63, 399-415.
34. Wickens, I D. (1982). Models for behavior: Stochastic processes in psychology. San Francisco: Freeman.