IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v45y2016i2p348-371.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measurement Directiveness as a Cause of Response Bias

Author

Listed:
  • Philip S. Brenner
  • John DeLamater

Abstract

Extant research comparing survey self-reports of normative behavior to direct observations and time diary data have yielded evidence of extensive measurement bias. However, most of this research program has relied on observational data, comparing independent samples from the same target population, rather than comparing survey self-reports to a criterion measure for individual respondents. This research addresses the next step using data from two studies. In each study, respondents completed a conventional survey questionnaire, including questions about frequency of religious behavior. Respondents were then asked to participate in a text messaging (short message service) data collection procedure, reporting either (1) participation in religious behavior specifically or (2) all changes in major activity without explicitly specifying religious behavior. Findings suggest that directive measurement, priming the respondent to consider the focal behavior, is a cause of measurement bias.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip S. Brenner & John DeLamater, 2016. "Measurement Directiveness as a Cause of Response Bias," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 45(2), pages 348-371, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:45:y:2016:i:2:p:348-371
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124114558630
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124114558630
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124114558630?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. Hans Andersson & Donald Granberg, 1997. "On the validity and reliability of self-reported vote: validity without reliability?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 127-140, May.
    2. Philip Brenner & John DeLamater, 2014. "Social Desirability Bias in Self-reports of Physical Activity: Is an Exercise Identity the Culprit?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(2), pages 489-504, June.
    3. Iiris Niemi, 1993. "Systematic error in behavioural measurement: Comparing results from interview and time budget studies," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 229-244, November.
    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. Marta Palczyńska & Maja Rynko, 2021. "ICT skills measurement in social surveys: Can we trust self-reports?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 917-943, June.
    2. Philip S. Brenner, 2021. "Effects of Nonresponse, Measurement, and Coverage Bias in Survey Estimates of Voting," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(2), pages 939-954, March.
    3. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5j2m1g6i7j8pnapkjvifl6e30f is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Alireza Nili & Mary Tate & David Johnstone, 2019. "The process of solving problems with self-service technologies: a study from the user’s perspective," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 373-407, June.
    5. Winter, James C. & Darmstadt, Gary L. & Davis, Jennifer, 2021. "The role of piped water supplies in advancing health, economic development, and gender equality in rural communities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 270(C).
    6. I-Hua Chu & Yu-Ling Chen & Pei-Tzu Wu & Wen-Lan Wu & Lan-Yuen Guo, 2021. "The Associations between Self-Determined Motivation, Multidimensional Self-Efficacy, and Device-Measured Physical Activity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-11, July.
    7. Joachim Merz, 2009. "Time Use and Time Budge. Improvements, Future Challenges and Recommendations," RatSWD Working Papers 85, German Data Forum (RatSWD).
    8. Körner Thomas & Wolff Loup, 2016. "“Do the Germans Really Work Six Weeks More than the French?” – Measuring Working Time with the Labour Force Survey in France and Germany," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 32(2), pages 405-431, June.
    9. Costa-Font, Joan & Fleche, Sarah & Pagan, Ricardo, 2024. "The labour market returns to sleep," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    10. Yee Kan, Â Man, 2006. "Measuring housework participation: the gap between ‘stylised’ questionnaire estimates and diary-based estimates," ISER Working Paper Series 2006-11, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    11. Ragni Kitterød, 2001. "Does the recording of parallel activities in Time Use Diaries affect the way people report their main activities?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 145-178, November.
    12. Michael Bittman & Paula England & Nancy Folbre & George Matheson, 2001. "When Gender Trumps Money: Bargaining and Time in Household Work," JCPR Working Papers 221, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    13. Simon Bittmann, 2015. "Ressources économiques des femmes et travail domestique des conjoints : quels effets pour quelles tâches ?," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-01309219, HAL.
    14. Christina Boll & Julian Leppin & Nora Reich, 2014. "Paternal childcare and parental leave policies: evidence from industrialized countries," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 129-158, March.
    15. Joachim Merz, 2009. "Zeitverwendungsforschung und Mediennutzung," FFB-Discussionpaper 76, Research Institute on Professions (Forschungsinstitut Freie Berufe (FFB)), LEUPHANA University Lüneburg.
    16. Petra Klumb & Meinrad Perrez, 2004. "Why Time-Sampling Studies Can Enrich Work–Leisure Research," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 67(1), pages 1-10, June.
    17. André Krouwel & Annemarie Elfrinkhof, 2014. "Combining strengths of methods of party positioning to counter their weaknesses: the development of a new methodology to calibrate parties on issues and ideological dimensions," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1455-1472, May.
    18. Sofia Amaral & Lelys Dinarte-Diaz & Patricio Dominguez & Steffanny Romero & Santiago M. Perez-Vincent, 2022. "Talk or Text? Evaluating Response Rates by Remote Survey Method during Covid-19," CESifo Working Paper Series 9517, CESifo.
    19. Auspurg, Katrin & Iacovou, Maria & Nicoletti, Cheti, 2014. "Housework Share between Partners: Experimental Evidence on Gender Identity," IZA Discussion Papers 8569, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Conor Philpott & Brian Donovan & Sarahjane Belton & Diarmuid Lester & Michael Duncan & Fiona Chambers & Wesley O’Brien, 2020. "Investigating the Age-Related Association between Perceived Motor Competence and Actual Motor Competence in Adolescence," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-18, September.
    21. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5j2m1g6i7j8pnapkjvifl6e30f is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Michael Bittman & Robert Goodin, 2000. "An Equivalence Scale for Time," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 291-311, December.

    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:sae:somere:v:45:y:2016:i:2:p:348-371. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.