IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v185y2022i1p134-155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating stochastic survey response errors using the multitrait‐multierror model

Author

Listed:
  • Alexandru Cernat
  • Daniel L. Oberski

Abstract

Surveys are well known to contain response errors of different types, including acquiescence, social desirability, common method variance and random error simultaneously. Nevertheless, a single error source at a time is all that most methods developed to estimate and correct for such errors consider in practice. Consequently, estimation of response errors is inefficient, their relative importance is unknown and the optimal question format may not be discoverable. To remedy this situation, we demonstrate how multiple types of errors can be estimated concurrently with the recently introduced ‘multitrait‐multierror’ (MTME) approach. MTME combines the theory of design of experiments with latent variable modelling to estimate response error variances of different error types simultaneously. This allows researchers to evaluate which errors are most impactful, and aids in the discovery of optimal question formats. We apply this approach using representative data from the United Kingdom to six survey items measuring attitudes towards immigrants that are commonly used across public opinion studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexandru Cernat & Daniel L. Oberski, 2022. "Estimating stochastic survey response errors using the multitrait‐multierror model," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(1), pages 134-155, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:185:y:2022:i:1:p:134-155
    DOI: 10.1111/rssa.12733
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12733
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rssa.12733?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Eid, 2000. "A multitrait-multimethod model with minimal assumptions," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 241-261, June.
    2. Bekker, Paul A., 1989. "Identification in restricted factor models and the evaluation of rank conditions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 5-16, May.
    3. Paul Boeck, 2008. "Random Item IRT Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 533-559, December.
    4. D. L. Oberski & A. Kirchner & S. Eckman & F. Kreuter, 2017. "Evaluating the Quality of Survey and Administrative Data with Generalized Multitrait-Multimethod Models," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(520), pages 1477-1489, October.
    5. Oberski, Daniel, 2014. "lavaan.survey: An R Package for Complex Survey Analysis of Structural Equation Models," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 57(i01).
    6. Alexander L. Janus, 2010. "The Influence of Social Desirability Pressures on Expressed Immigration Attitudes," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(4), pages 928-946, December.
    7. Boeschoten Laura & Oberski Daniel & de Waal Ton, 2017. "Estimating Classification Errors Under Edit Restrictions in Composite Survey-Register Data Using Multiple Imputation Latent Class Modelling (MILC)," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 33(4), pages 921-962, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Quinn N. Lathrop & Ying Cheng, 2017. "Item Cloning Variation and the Impact on the Parameters of Response Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 245-263, March.
    2. Anthony Evans & Willem Sleegers & Žan Mlakar, 2020. "Individual differences in receptivity to scientific bullshit," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 401-412, May.
    3. George Halkos & Kyriaki Tsilika, 2015. "Programming Identification Criteria in Simultaneous Equation Models," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 46(1), pages 157-170, June.
    4. Antonio Caronni & Marina Ramella & Pietro Arcuri & Claudia Salatino & Lucia Pigini & Maurizio Saruggia & Chiara Folini & Stefano Scarano & Rosa Maria Converti, 2023. "The Rasch Analysis Shows Poor Construct Validity and Low Reliability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology 2.0 (QUEST 2.0) Questionnaire," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-19, January.
    5. van Delden Arnout & van der Laan Jan & Prins Annemarie, 2018. "Detecting Reporting Errors in Data from Decentralised Autonomous Administrations with an Application to Hospital Data," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 34(4), pages 863-888, December.
    6. Simone Schüller, 2016. "The Effects of 9/11 on Attitudes toward Immigration and the Moderating Role of Education," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(4), pages 604-632, November.
    7. Pezzuti, Lina & Tommasi, Marco & Saggino, Aristide & Dawe, James & Lauriola, Marco, 2020. "Gender differences and measurement bias in the assessment of adult intelligence: Evidence from the Italian WAIS-IV and WAIS-R standardizations," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    8. Sun-Joo Cho & Allan S. Cohen, 2010. "A Multilevel Mixture IRT Model With an Application to DIF," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 35(3), pages 336-370, June.
    9. Meyer, Bruce D. & Mittag, Nikolas, 2019. "Combining Administrative and Survey Data to Improve Income Measurement," IZA Discussion Papers 12266, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Peter G. M. van der Heijden & Maarten Cruyff & Paul A. Smith & Christine Bycroft & Patrick Graham & Nathaniel Matheson‐Dunning, 2022. "Multiple system estimation using covariates having missing values and measurement error: Estimating the size of the Māori population in New Zealand," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(1), pages 156-177, January.
    11. Julia Morgan & Casey Canfield, 2021. "Comparing Behavioral Theories to Predict Consumer Interest to Participate in Energy Sharing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-17, July.
    12. Adrian Chadi & Matthias Krapf, 2017. "The Protestant Fiscal Ethic: Religious Confession And Euro Skepticism In Germany," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1813-1832, October.
    13. Reynolds, J.P. & Pilling, M. & Marteau, T.M., 2018. "Communicating quantitative evidence of policy effectiveness and support for the policy: Three experimental studies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 1-12.
    14. Sun-Joo Cho & Sarah Brown-Schmidt & Woo-yeol Lee, 2018. "Autoregressive Generalized Linear Mixed Effect Models with Crossed Random Effects: An Application to Intensive Binary Time Series Eye-Tracking Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 83(3), pages 751-771, September.
    15. Sijia Huang & Li Cai, 2024. "Cross-Classified Item Response Theory Modeling With an Application to Student Evaluation of Teaching," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 49(3), pages 311-341, June.
    16. Mariagiulia Matteucci & Bernard Veldkamp, 2015. "The approach of power priors for ability estimation in IRT models," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 917-926, May.
    17. Bloemraad, Irene & Voss, Kim & Silva, Fabiana, 2014. "Framing the Immigrant Movement as about Rights, Family, or Economics: Which Appeals Resonate and for Whom?," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt3b32w33p, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    18. Hanneke Geerlings & Cees Glas & Wim Linden, 2011. "Modeling Rule-Based Item Generation," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 76(2), pages 337-359, April.
    19. Sun-Joo Cho & Paul Boeck & Susan Embretson & Sophia Rabe-Hesketh, 2014. "Additive Multilevel Item Structure Models with Random Residuals: Item Modeling for Explanation and Item Generation," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 79(1), pages 84-104, January.
    20. Royce Anders & William Batchelder, 2015. "Cultural Consensus Theory for the Ordinal Data Case," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(1), pages 151-181, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:185:y:2022:i:1:p:134-155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.