Skip to main content
Log in

Why are You Calling Me? How Study Introductions Change Response Patterns

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose: Research on survey methodology has demonstrated that seemingly innocuous aspects of a survey’s design, such as the order of questions, can produce biased results. The current investigation extends this work by testing whether standard survey introductions alter the observed associations between variables. Methods: In two experimental studies, we invited Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients to participate in a telephone survey of (a) Parkinson’s patients, conducted by a regional medical center, or (b) the general population, conducted by a regional university. The survey in Study 1 (n = 156) first assessed life-satisfaction, and subsequently health satisfaction. In Study 2 (n = 99), we reversed the order of the two questions, asking the health questions first. Results: When the introduction focused on Parkinson’s disease, we observed an increased correlation between life-satisfaction and a later question about health satisfaction (r = 0.34 vs. 0.63 after general population versus Parkinson’s introduction, respectively; Study 1). In Study 2, asking the health questions first resulted in high correlations regardless of the introduction; in addition, judgments of life-satisfaction were lower after the Parkinson’s-focused introduction. Conclusions: When participants were informed prior to the survey that its purpose was to examine well-being in PD, health satisfaction was a much more important component of life-satisfaction, accounting for three times as much variation. We hypothesize that the survey introduction primed participants’ health status, resulting in an artificially large correlation with life-satisfaction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. N Schwarz (1999) ArticleTitleSelf-reports: How the questions shape the answers Am Psychol 54 93–105 Occurrence Handle10.1037/0003-066X.54.2.93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. R Tourangeau LJ Rips K Rasinski (2000) The Psychology of Survey Response Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  3. S Sudman N Bradburn N Schwarz (1996) Thinking About Answers: The Application of Cognitive Processes to Survey Methodology Jossey-Bass San Francisco, CA

    Google Scholar 

  4. F Strack LL Martin N Schwarz (1988) ArticleTitlePriming and communication: The social determinants of information use in judgments of life-satisfaction Eur J Soc Psychol 18 429–442

    Google Scholar 

  5. N Schwarz F Strack (1999) Reports of subjective well-being: Judgmental processes and their methodological implications D Kahneman E Diener N Schwarz (Eds) Well-being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology Russell-Sage New York 61–84

    Google Scholar 

  6. S Haberstroh D Oyserman N Schwarz U Kühnen LJ Ji (2002) ArticleTitleIs the interdependent self more sensitive to question context than the independent self? Self-construal and the observation of conversational norms J Exp Soc Psychol 38 323–329 Occurrence Handle10.1006/jesp.2001.1513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. S Oishi U Schimmack SJ Colcombe (2003) ArticleTitleThe contextual and systematic nature of life-satisfaction judgments J Exp Soc Psychol 39 232–247 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00016-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. N Schwarz F Strack HP Mai (1991) ArticleTitleAssimilation and contrast effects in part-whole question sequences: A conversational logic analysis Public Opin Q 55 3–23 Occurrence Handle10.1086/269239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. N Schwarz H Bless (1992) Constructing reality and its alternatives: Assimilation and contrast effects in social judgment LL Martin A Tesser (Eds) The Construction of Social Judgment Erlbaum Hillsdale, NJ 217–245

    Google Scholar 

  10. N Schwarz (1996) Cognition and Communication: Judgmental Biases, Research Methods and the Logic of Conversation Erlbaum Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  11. A Norenzayan N Schwarz (1999) ArticleTitleTelling what they want to know: Participants tailor causal attributions to researchers’ interests Eur J Soc Psychol 29 1011–1020 Occurrence Handle10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199912)29:8<1011::AID-EJSP974>3.0.CO;2-A

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. HH Clark MF Schober (1992) Asking questions and influencing answers JM Tanur (Eds) Questions About Questions Russel Sage New York 15–48

    Google Scholar 

  13. H Schuman S Presser (1981) Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys Academic Press New York

    Google Scholar 

  14. HP Grice (1975) Logic and conversation P Cole JL Morgan (Eds) Syntax and Semantics, Vol.3: Speech Acts Academic Press New York 41–58

    Google Scholar 

  15. HH Clark SE Haviland (1977) Comprehension and the given-new contract RO Freedle (Eds) Discourse Production and Comprehension Erlbaum Hillsdale, NJ 1–40

    Google Scholar 

  16. H Cantril (1944) Gauging Public Opinion Princeton University Press Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  17. SL Payne (1951) The Art of Asking Questions Princeton University Press Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  18. RM Groves RB Cialdini MP Couper (1992) ArticleTitleUnderstanding the decision to participate in a survey Public Opin Q 56 475–495 Occurrence Handle10.1086/269338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. RM Groves FJ Fowler MP Couper JM Lepkowski E Singer R Tourangeau (2004) Survey Methodology Wiley New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. MA Okun WA Stock MJ Haring RA Witter (1984) ArticleTitleHealth and subjective well-being: A Meta-Analysis Int J Aging Hum Dev 19 111–132 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BiqC3czptVQ%3D Occurrence Handle6519817

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. M Wänke N Schwarz (1997) Reducing question order effects: The operation of buffer items L Lyberg P Biemer M Collins E DeLeeuw C Dippo N Schwarz (Eds) Survey Measurement and Process Quality Wiley Chichester, UK 115–140

    Google Scholar 

  22. N Schwarz B Knäuper (2000) Cognition, aging, and self-reports D Park N Schwarz (Eds) Cognitive Aging. A primer Psychology Press Philadelphia, PA 233–252

    Google Scholar 

  23. D Kahneman AB Krueger D Schkade N Schwarz AA Stone (2004) ArticleTitleA survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The Day Reconstruction Method (DRM) Science 306 1776–1780 Occurrence Handle10.1126/science.1103572 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXhtVKitb7K Occurrence Handle15576620

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. J Riis G Loewenstein J Baron C Jepson A Fagerlin PA Ubel (2005) ArticleTitleIgnorance of hedonic adaptation to Hemo-Dialysis: A␣study using ecological momentary assessment J Exp Psychol Gen 134 IssueID1 3–9 Occurrence Handle10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.3 Occurrence Handle15702959

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. J Jaccard CK Wan (1996) LISREL Approaches to Interaction Effects in Multiple Regression Sage Publications Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  26. S Frederick G Loewenstein (1999) Hedonic adaptation D Kahneman E Diener N Schwarz (Eds) Well-being: Foundations of Hedonic Psychology Russell-Sage New York 302–329

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dylan M. Smith.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smith, D.M., Schwarz, N., Roberts, T.R. et al. Why are You Calling Me? How Study Introductions Change Response Patterns. Qual Life Res 15, 621–630 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-4529-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-4529-5

Keywords

Navigation