Quality & Quantity

, Volume 47, Issue 3, pp 1397–1411 | Cite as

A comparison of open-ended and closed questions in the prediction of mental health

Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

The statistical benefit of adding open-ended questions to closed questions was evaluated in a survey of 643 participants. The construct of coping was chosen as the measurement domain. Open and closed questions were used to predict mental health a year later. Verbatim responses to open questions were reliably coded (ICC = 0.92), but they did not increase the statistical prediction of measures of mental health beyond the contribution of closed questions. Open-ended questions provided more in-depth information than closed questions, but at the cost of more missing data and less degrees of freedom. The benefit of using open-ended in addition to standard closed questions was thus practically nil, hence questioning the use of qualitative information gathering in surveys for the purpose of statistical prediction.

Keywords

Survey questions Open-ended Closed Statistical prediction 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Antonovsky A.: The structure and properties of the Sense of coherence scale. Soc. Sci. Med. 36(6), 725–733 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Antonovsky A.: The structure and properties of the Sense of coherence scale. In: McCubbin, H.I., Thompson, E.A., Thompson, A.I., Fromer, J.E. (eds) Stress, coping, and health in families: sense of coherence and resiliency, pp. 21–40. Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks (1998)Google Scholar
  3. Austenfeld J.L., Stanton A.L.: Coping through emotional approach: A new look at emotion, coping, and health-related outcomes. J. Personal. 72(6), 1335–1363 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Converse J.M.: Arguments and weak evidence: The open/closed questioning controversy of the 1940s. Pub. Opin. Quart. 48(1B), 267–282 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Darlington A.S., Dippel D.W., Ribbers G.M., van Balen R., Passchier J., Busschbach J.J.: Coping strategies as determinants of quality of life in stroke patients: A longitudinal study. Cerebrovasc. Dis. 23(5-6), 401–407 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eriksson M., Lindstrom B.: Validity of Antonovsky’s sense of coherence scale: a systematic review. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 59(6), 460–466 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eriksson M., Lindstrom B.: Antonovsky’s sense of coherence scale and the relation with health: a systematic review. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 60(5), 376–381 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Falthzik A.M., Carroll S.J.: Rate of return for closed versus open-ended questions in a mail questionnaire survey of industrial organizations. Psychol. Rep. 29(3), 1121–1122 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Filazoglu G., Griva K.: Coping and social support and health related quality of life in women with breast cancer in Turkey. Psychol, Health Med. 13(5), 559–573 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Folkman S., Lazarus R.S.: If it changes it must be a process: Study of emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 48(1), 150–170 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Folkman S., Lazarus R.S.: The relationship between coping and emotion: Implications for theory and research. Soc. Sci. Med. 26(3), 309–317 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gil S., Caspi Y.: Personality traits, coping style, and perceived threat as predictors of posttraumatic stress disorder after exposure to a terrorist attack: A prospective study. Psychosom. Med. 68(6), 904–909 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greenfield T.K., Nayak M.B., Bond J., Ye Y., Midanik L.T.: Maximum quantity consumed and alcohol-related problems: Assessing the most alcohol drunk with two measures. Alcohol. Clin. Exp. Res. 30(9), 1576–1582 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gunthert K.C., Cohen L.H., Armeli S.: The role of neuroticism in daily stress and coping. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 77(5), 1087–1100 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kessler R.C., Merikangas K.R., Wang P.S.: Prevalence, comorbidity, and service utilization for mood disorders in the United States at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Ann. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 3, 137–158 (2007). doi: 10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091444 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lavik N.J., Laake P., Hauff E., Solberg O.: The use of self-reports in psychiatric studies of traumatized refugees: Validation and analysis of HSCL-25. Nordic J. Psychiat. 53(1), 17–20 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lazarus R.: Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University Press, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  18. Lien L., Claussen B., Hauff E., Thoresen M., Bjertness E.: Bodily pain and associated mental distress among immigrant adolescents: A population-based cross-sectional study. Eur Child Adolesc. Psychiat. 14(7), 371–375 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Likert, R.: a technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology 22(140) (1932)Google Scholar
  20. MacLaughlin E.J., Raehl C.L., Treadway A.K., Sterling T.L., Zoller D.P., Bond C.A.: Assessing medication adherence in the elderly: which tools to use in clinical practice? . Drugs & Aging 22, 231–255 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Miller G.V.F., Travers C.J.: Ethnicity and the experience of work: Job stress and satisfaction of minority ethnic teachers in the UK. Int. Rev. Psychiat. 17(5), 317–327 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Morris, B.A., Shakespeare-Finch, J., Scott, J.L.: coping processes and dimensions of posttraumatic growth. Austral. J. Disaster Trauma Stud, pp. 1–12 (2007)Google Scholar
  23. Pollard C., Kennedy P.: A longitudinal analysis of emotional impact, coping strategies and post-traumatic psychological growth following spinal cord injury: a 10-year review. Br. J. Health Psychol. 12(3), 347–362 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Regier D.A., Rae D.S., Narrow W.E., Kaelber C.T., Schatzberg A.F.: Prevalence of anxiety disorders and their comorbidity with mood and addictive disorders. Br. J. Psychiat. 173(34), 24–28 (1998)Google Scholar
  25. Reynolds R.F., Obermeyer C.M., Walker A.M., Guilbert D.: The role of treatment intentions and concerns about side effects in women’s decision to discontinue postmenopausal hormone therapy. Maturitas 43(3), 183–194 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rudolph K.D., Dennig M.D., Weisz J.R.: Determinants and consequences of children’s coping in the medical setting: conceptualization, review, and critique. Psychol. Bull. 118(3), 328–357 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Scheier M.F., Carver C.S.: Optimism, coping, and health: assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychol. 4(3), 219–247 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Scheier M.F., Carver C.S., Bridges M.W.: Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): a reevaluation of the Life Orientation Test. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 67(6), 1063–1078 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schuman H., Presser S.: The open and closed question. Am. Sociol. Rev. 44, 692–712 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schuman H., Presser S., Ludwig J.: Context effects on survey responses to questions about abortion. Pub. Opin. Quart. 45(2), 216–223 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schwarz N.: Self-reports: how the questions shape the answers. Am. Psychol. 54(2), 93–105 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schwarz N., Hippler H.-J.: Subsequent questions may influence answers to preceding questions in mail surveys. Pub. Opin. Quart. 59(1), 93–97 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Skinner E.A.: Coping assessment. In: Ayers, S., Baum, A., McManus, C., Newman, S., Wallston, K., Weinman, J., West , R. (eds) Psychology, Health and Medicine, pp. 245–250. Cambridge University Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  34. Skinner E.A., Edge K., Altman J., Sherwood H.: for the structure of coping: a review and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping. Psychol. Bull. 129(2), 216–269 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith T.W., Pope M.K., Rhodewalt F., Poulton J.L.: Optimism, neuroticism, coping, and symptom reports: an alternative interpretation of the Life Orientation Test. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 56(4), 640–648 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sørlie T., Sexton H.C.: The factor structure of “The Ways of Coping Questionnaire” and the process of coping in surgical patients. Personal. Individ. Diff. 30(6), 961–975 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Strand B.H., Dalgard O.S., Tambs K., Rognerud M.: Measuring the mental health status of the Norwegian population: a comparison of the instruments SCL-25, SCL-10, SCL-5 and MHI-5 (SF-36). Nordic J. Psychiat. 57(2), 113–118 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Strauss A., Corbin J.: Basics of qualitative research. Sage Publications, California (1998)Google Scholar
  39. Streiner D.L., Norman G.R.: Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use, 4th ed. Oxford University Press, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  40. Taylor S.E., Stanton A.L.: Coping resources, coping processes, and mental health. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 3, 377–401 (2007). doi: 10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091520 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Werner E.E., Smith R.S.: Overcoming the odds: high risk children from birth to adulthood. Cornell University Press, Ithaca (1992)Google Scholar
  42. Werner E.E., Smith R.S.: Journeys from childhood to midlife: risk, resilience, and recovery. Cornell University Press, Ithaca (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of PsychologyUniversity of TromsøTromsøNorway
  2. 2.Psychiatric Research Centre of North NorwayUniversity Hospital of North NorwayTromsøNorway

Personalised recommendations