Estimation of the effects of measurement characteristics on the quality of survey questions

Survey Research Methods

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 29-43

  Saris, Willem E ^a   Gallhofer, Irmtraud ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT RAMON LLULL   (Spain)

Author keywords

Meta analysis; MTMM; Reliability and validity of questions

Indexed keywords

EID: 70450122254     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18643361     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Alwin, D. (1997). Feeling thermometers versus 7-point scales: Which are better ? Sociological Methods and Research, 25, 318-341.
2. Andrews, F. (1984). Construct validity and error components of survey measures. a structural modeling approach. Public Opinion Quarterly, 48, 409-442.
3. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1991). Multitrait-multimethod matrices in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 426-439.
4. Belson, W. (1981). The design and understanding of survey questions. London: Gower.
5. Billiet, J., Loosveldt, G., & Waterplas, L. (1986). Het surveyinterview onderzocht: effecten van het ontwerp en gebruik van vragenlijsten op de kwaliteit van de antwoorden (research on surveys: effects of the design and use of questionnaires on the quality of the responses). Leuven: Sociologisch Onderzoeksinstituut KU Leuven.
6. Campbell, D., & Fiske, D. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait multimethod matrices. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
7. Coenders, G., & Saris, W. (2000). Testing nested additive, multiplicative and general multitraitmultimethod models. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 219-250.
8. Corten, I., Saris, W., Coenders, G., Veld, W., Aalberts, C., & Kornelis, C. (2002). Fit of different models for multitraitmultimethod experiments. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 213-232.
9. Cox, E. (1980). The optimal number of response alternatives for a scale: A review. Journal of Marketing research, 17, 407-422.
10. Dillman, D. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored method. New York: Wiley.
11. Eid, M., & Diener, E. (2006). Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology. Washington,DC: American Psychological Association.
12. Esposito, J., Campanelli, P., Rothgeb, J., & Polivka, A. (1991). Determining which questions are best: Methodologies for evaluating survey questions.
13. Esposito, J., & Rothgeb, J. (1997). Evaluating survey data: Making the transition from pretesting to quality assesment. In L. Lyberg et al. (Eds.), Survey measurement and process quality (p. 541-571). New York: Wiley.
14. Forsyth, B., Lessler, J., & Hubbard, M. (1992). Cognitive evaluation of the questionnaire. In C. Tanur & R. Tourangeau (Eds.), Cognition and survey research (p. 183-198). New York: Wiley.
15. Gallhofer, I., & Saris, W. (2000). Formulierung und Klassifikation von Fragen. ZUMA Nachrichten, 46, 43-72.
16. Graesser, A., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Kreuz, R., & Wiemer-Hastings, P. (2000). Quaid: A questionnaire evaluation aid for survey methodologists. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 32, 254-262.
17. Graesser, A., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Wiemer-Hastings, P., & Kreuz, R. (2000). The gold standard of question quality on surveys: Experts, computer tools, versus statistical indices.
18. Kenny, D., & Kashy, D. (1992). Analysis of the multitraitmultimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 165-172.
19. Klingemann, H. (1997). The left-right self-placement question in face to face and telephone surveys. In W. Saris & M. Kaase (Eds.), Eurobarometer: Measurement instruments for opinions in europe (Vol. 2, p. 113-125). Mannheim: Zuma Nachrichten Spezial.
20. Költringer, R. (1995). Measurement quality in austrian personal interview surveys. In W. Saris & A. M¨unnich (Eds.), The multitrait-multimethod approach to evaluate measurement instruments (p. 207-225). Budapest: Eötvös University Press.
21. Krosnick, J., & Abelson, R. (1991). The case for measuring attitude strength in surveys. In J. Tanur (Ed.), Questions about questions. inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys (p. 177-203). New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
22. Krosnick, J., & Fabrigar, L. (forthcoming). Designing questionnaires to measure attitudes.
23. Marsh, H., & Bailey, M. (1991). Confirmatory factor analyses of multitrait-multimethod data: A comparison of alternative models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 47-70.
24. Molenaar, N. (1986). Formuleringseffecten in survey-interviews. Amsterdam: VU uitgeverij.
25. Presser, S., & Blair, J. (1994). Survey pretesting: Do different methods produce different results? In Marsden (Ed.), Sociological methodology (p. 73-104). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
26. Rogers, W., Andrews, F., & Herzog, A. (1992). Quality of survey measures: a structural modeling approach. Journal of Official Statistics, 8, 251-275.
27. Saris, W. (1988). Variation in response functions: a source of measurement error in attitude research. Amsterdam: Sociometric Research Foundation.
28. Saris, W. (1990). The choice of a model for evaluation of measurement instruments. InW. E. Saris & A. van Meurs (Eds.), Evaluation of measurement instruments by meta-analysis of multitraitmultimethod studies (p. 118-133). Amsterdam: North Holland.
29. Saris, W., & Aalberts, C. (2003). Different explanantions for correlated errors in mtmm studies. Structural Equation modeling, 10, 193-214.
30. Saris, W., & Andrews, F. (1991). Evaluation of measurement instruments using a structural modeling approach. In P. Biemer, R. Groves, L. Lyberg, N. Mathiowetz,&S. Sudman (Eds.), Measurement errors in surveys (p. 575-599). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
31. Saris, W., & Gallhofer, I. (1998). Classificatie van survey-vragen. Tijdschrift voor Communicatie wetenschap, 96-122.
32. Saris, W., & Gallhofer, I. (2004). Operationalization of social science concepts by intuition. Quality and Quantity, 38, 235-258.
33. Saris, W., & Gallhofer, I. (2007). Design, evaluation and analysis of questionnaires or survey research. New York: Wiley.
34. Saris, W., & Krosnick, J. (2007). Comparing the quality of agree/disagree questions and balanced forced choice questions via a split ballot mtmm experiment.
35. Saris, W., Satorra, A., & Coenders, G. (2004). A new approach for evaluating quality of measurement instruments: Split ballot mtmm design. In R. Stoltenberg (Ed.), Sociological methodology (p. 311-347). Blackwell.
36. Saris, W., Wijk, T., & Scherpenzeel, A. (1998). Validity and reliability of subjective social indicators: the effect of different measures of association. Social Indicators Research, 45, 173-199.
37. Scherpenzeel, A. (1995). A question of quality. evaluating survey questions by multitrait-multimethod studies. Leidschendam (the Netherlands): KPN Research.
38. Scherpenzeel, A., & Saris, W. (1997). The validity and reliability of survey questions: a meta-analysis of mtmm studies. Sociological Methods and Research, 25, 341-383.
39. Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers in attitude surveys: experiments on question form, order and context. New York: Academic Press.
40. Sudman, S., & Bradburn, N. (1982). Asking questions: A practical guide to questionnaire design. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
41. Sudman, S., Brandburn, N., & Schwartz, N. (1996). Thinking about answers: The application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
42. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43. Wothke, W. (1996). Models for multitrait-multimethod matrix analysis. In G. Marcoulides & R. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling. issues and techniques (p. 7-56). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
44. Zouwen, J. (2000). An assessment of the difficulty of questions used in the issp questionnaires, the clarity of their wording and the comparability of the responses. ZA-Informationen, 45, 96-114.