Estimating Survey Questionnaire Profiles for Measurement Error Risk

Surveys differ in their topics, language, style and design, and, consequently, in their sensitivity to measurement error. Survey literature presents a range of characteristics of survey items that are assumed to be related to the magnitude and frequency of measurement error. In terms of questionnaire design and testing, it would be very useful to have a questionnaire profile that is a summary of the characteristics of the items contained in a questionnaire. This holds especially true in the context of multi-mode surveys where the detection of measurement error is crucial. The questionnaire profiles may be derived from scores that coders assign to the items in a questionnaire. Given that agreement among coders may be relatively low, as we observe, the number of coders must be large to ensure sufficient precision of the profiles. For multiple surveys, the coding workload may then become infeasible. In this paper, we propose methodology for the estimation of questionnaire profiles when a pool of coders is randomly allocated to a series of surveys. The methodology is based on multiple imputation and applied to eleven general purpose surveys in the Netherlands..

[1]  Stanley Presser,et al.  SURVEY PRETESTING: DO DIFFERENT METHODS PRODUCE DIFFERENT RESULTS? , 1994 .

[2]  R. Tourangeau,et al.  Sensitive questions in surveys. , 2007, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  K. Olson,et al.  An Examination of Questionnaire Evaluation by Expert Reviewers , 2010 .

[4]  Frauke Kreuter,et al.  Using paradata to explore item level response times in surveys , 2013 .

[5]  Willem E. Saris,et al.  Estimation of the effects of measurement characteristics on the quality of survey questions , 2007 .

[6]  Antje Kirchner,et al.  Assessing the Mechanisms of Misreporting to Filter Questions in Surveys , 2014 .

[7]  Barry Schouten,et al.  Disentangling mode-specific selection and measurement bias in social surveys. , 2013, Social science research.

[8]  Jon A. Krosnick,et al.  The Reliability of Survey Attitude Measurement , 1991 .

[9]  Jolene D Smyth,et al.  THE EFFECT OF CATI QUESTIONS, RESPONDENTS, AND INTERVIEWERS ON RESPONSE TIME , 2015 .

[10]  Mohamed Shoukri,et al.  Measures of Interobserver Agreement and Reliability , 2010 .

[11]  J. Fleiss Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. , 1971 .

[12]  L. Rips,et al.  The Psychology of Survey Response , 2000 .

[13]  N. C. Schaeffer,et al.  Questions for Surveys: Current Trends and Future Directions. , 2011, Public opinion quarterly.

[14]  F. Kreuter,et al.  Social Desirability Bias in CATI, IVR, and Web Surveys The Effects of Mode and Question Sensitivity , 2008 .

[15]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Question Understanding Aid (QUAID) A Web Facility that Tests Question Comprehensibility , 2006 .

[16]  Wil Dijkstra,et al.  Retrospective questions: data quality, task difficulty, and the use of a checklist , 1995 .

[17]  B. Buelens,et al.  The impact of Survey item characteristics on mode-specific measurement bias in the Crime Victimisation Survey , 2014 .

[18]  R. Tourangeau,et al.  Fast times and easy questions: the effects of age, experience and question complexity on web survey response times , 2008 .