The Instruction set of Questionnaires can Affect the Structure of the Data: Application to Self-Rated State Anxiety
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
The present study tested the assumption that self-ratings, such as those used for measuring state anxiety, do not measure a one-dimensional transcendent entity but involve decisions based on a multi-dimensional judgment. Two groups of subjects were presented with a balanced nine-item state anxiety questionnaire. Each group received a different set of instructions (a standard set and an altered instruction set suggesting unidimensionality of the questions in the questionnaire). It was hypothesized that this change in instructions would impact the structure of the data. The impact of the instructions was detectable at the level of the observed correlation between the negative and positive composites, Cohen's (1988) q=−0.27$. A multigroup confirmatory factor analysis showed that positive and negative wording factors correlated more strongly when unidimensionality was suggested than when standard instructions were used, q=−0.54. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
- Billiet, J.B. and McClendon, M.J. (2000), Modeling acquiescence in measurement: Models for two balanced sets of items, Structural Equation Modeling 7, 608–628.
- Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G.J. and van Heerden, J. (2003), The theoretical status oflatent variables, Psychological Review 110, 203–219.
- Cohen, J. (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd edition, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Eid, M., Lischetzke, T., Nussbeck, F.W. and Trierweiler, L. (2003), Separating trait effects from trait-specific method effects in multitrait-multimethod models: A multiple-indicator CT-C (M-1) model. Psychological Methods 8, 38–60.
- Fabrigar, L.R., MacCallum, R.C., Weneger, D.T. and Strahan, E.J. (1999), Evaluating the use ofexploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods 4, 272–299.
- Floyd, F.J. and Widaman, K.F. (1995), Factor analysis in the development and refinement ofclinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment 7, 286–299.
- Iwata, N. and Higuchi, H.-R. (2000), Responses ofJapanese and American university students to the STAI items that assess the presence or absence ofanxiety, Journal of Personality Assessment 74, 48–62.
- Kvaal, K., Laake, K. and Engedal, K. (2001). Psychometric properties ofthe state part ofthe Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) in geriatric patients, International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 16, 980–986.
- Pilotte, W.J. and Gable, R.K. (1990), The impact ofpositive and negative item stems on the validity ofa computer anxiety scale, Educational and Psychological Measurement 50, 603–619.
- Schwarz, N. (1999), Self-reports. How the questions shape the answers, American Psychologist 54, 93–105.
- Schwarz, N. and Strack, F. (1999), Reports ofsubjective well-being: Judgmental processes and their methodological implications, in: D. Kahneman, E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.), Well-being. The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology (pp. 61–84). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
- Spielberger, C.D., Vagg, P.R., Barker, L.R., Donham, G.W. and Westberry, L.G. (1980). The factor structure of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, in C.D. Spielberger and I.G. Sarason (eds.), Stress and Anxiety, Volume 7 (pp. 95–109). Washington, DC: Hemisphere/Wiley.
- Spielberger, C.D., Gorsuch, R.L., Lushene, R., Vagg, P.R. and Jacobs, G.A. (1993), Manuel de l'Inventaire d'Anxiété État-Trait Forme Y (STAI-Y). Adaptépar M. Bruchon-Schweitzer et I. Paulhan. [Manual of STAI form Y. Adapted to French by M. Bruchon-Schweitzer and I. Paulhan]. Paris: Editions du Centre de Psychologie Appliquée.
- Spielberger, C.D., Ritterband, L.M., Sydeman, S.J., Reheiser, E.C. and Unger, K.K. (1995), Assessment ofemotional states and personality traits: Measuring psychological vital signs, in: J. N. Butcher (ed.), Clinical Personality Assessment (pp. 42–58). New York: Oxford University Press.
- StatSoft. (2001), STATISTICA for Windows [Computer software]. Tulsa, OK: Author.
- Steyer, R. (1989), Models of classical psychometric test theory as stochastic measurement models: Representation, uniqueness, meaningfulness, identifiability, and testability, Methodika 3, 25–60.
- Steyer, R. (2001), Classical (psychometric) test theory, in: T. Cook and C. Ragin (eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Logic of Inquiry and Research Design (pp. 1955–1962). Oxford: Pergamon. Retrieved September 25, 2002, from http: //www.unijena.de/svw/metheval/ start.php?go=publikationen&auswahl=1
- Tourangeau, R. and Rasinski, A. (1988), Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement, Psychological Bulletin 103, 299–314.
- Vagg, P.R., Spielberger, C.D. and O'Hearn, T.P.J. (1980), Is the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory multidimensional? Personality and Individual Differences 1, 207–214.
- Vautier, S., Callahan, S., Moncany, D. and Sztulman, H. (in press), A bi-stable view ofsingle constructs measured using balanced questionnaires: Application to trait anxiety. Structural Equation Modeling.
- The Instruction set of Questionnaires can Affect the Structure of the Data: Application to Self-Rated State Anxiety
Theory and Decision
Volume 54, Issue 3 , pp 249-259
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- State anxiety
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Stéphane Vautier, CERPP, UFR de Psychologie, Université de Toulouse Le Mirail, 5 Allées A. Machado, 31058 Cedex 9, France
- 2. CERPP, UFR de Psychologie, Université de Toulouse Le Mirail, 5 Allées A. Machado, 31058, Cedex 9, France