What Response Scales may Tell your Respondents: Informative Functions of Response Alternatives

  • Norbert Schwarz
  • Hans-J. Hippler
Part of the Recent Research in Psychology book series (PSYCHOLOGY)

Abstract

One of the most extensively discussed (though not most extensively researched, see Converse, 1984) issues in the literature on survey methodology is the choice between an open - or a closed - response format. Researchers are usually advised to use open-ended questions sparingly because they are time consuming, expensive, and difficult to analyze (e.g., Sheatsley, 1985; Sudman & Bradburn, 1983). In fact, “despite a few exceptions, the results of social surveys today are based mainly on what are varyingly called closed, fixed-choice, or precoded questions” (Schuman & Presser, 1981, p. 79). According to textbook: recommendations, the construction of precoded questions should be based on the responses to open-ended questions obtained during pilot studies.

Keywords

Income Tated Ather Clarification 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bradburn, N., & Davis, C. (1984). Potential contributions of cognitive research to survey questionnaire design. In T.B. Jabine, M.L. Straf, J.M. Tanur, & R. Tourangeau (Eds.), Cognitive aspects of survey methodology: Building a bridge between disciplines. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bradburn, N., Sudman, S., & Associates (1979). Improving interviewing methods and questionnaire design. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-BassGoogle Scholar
  3. Converse, J. M. (1984). Strong arguments and weak evidence: The open/closed questioning controversy of the 1940s. Public Opinion Quarterly. 48, 267–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Darschin, W., & Frank, B. (1982). Tendenzen im Zuschauerverhalten. Teleskopie-Ergebnise zur Fernsehnutzung im Jahre 1981. Media Perspektiven. 4, 276–284.Google Scholar
  5. Mueller, A. (1980). Einstellungen der Fernsehzuschauer zur weiteren Entwicklung des Mediums Fernsehen. Media Perspektiven. 3 179–186.Google Scholar
  6. Nisbett, R. E., Borgida, E., Crandall, R., & Reed, H. (1976). Popular inductions: information is not always Informative. In J. Carroll, & J. Payne (Eds.), Cognition and social behavior Potomac., MD.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Payne, S. L. (1951). The art of asking questions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Schwarz, N., Hippler, H. J., Deutsch, B., & Strack, F. (1985). Response categories: Effects on behavioral reports and comparative judgements. Public Opinion Quarterly. 49 388–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Schwarz, N., & Scheuring, B. (1985). Inter- und intraindividuelle Vergleichsprozesse als Funktion der Antwortvorgabe in Frageboegen. Paper presented at the 2nd Fachtagung Sozialpsychologie, Landau, FRG, February.Google Scholar
  10. Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Mueller, G., & Deutsch, B. (1985). The range of the response alternatives may determine the meaning of the question. Manuscript under editorial review.Google Scholar
  11. Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers in attitude surveys. Experiments on question form, wording, and context. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  12. Sheatsley, P. B. (1985). Questionnaire construction and item writing. In P. H. Rossi, J. D. Wright, &A. B. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of survey research. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  13. Simon, W. (1973). The social, the erotic, and the sensual: The complexities of sexual scripts. In J.K. Cole, & R. Dienstbier (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, Vol, 21, Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  14. Sudman, S., & Bradburn, N. M. (1974). Response effects in surveys. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  15. Sudman, S., & Bradburn, N.M. (1982). Asking Questions. San Francisco CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  16. Suis, J.M., & Miller, R.L. (Eds.) (1977). Social comparision processes; Theoretical and empirical perspectives. New York: Hemisphere Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Norbert Schwarz
    • 1
  • Hans-J. Hippler
    • 2
  1. 1.University of HeidelbergGermany
  2. 2.Center for Surveys, Methods and AnalysisMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations