IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ariqol/v17y2022i1d10.1007_s11482-020-09889-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Vague Quantifiers Demonstrate Little Susceptibility to Frame of Reference Effects

Author

Listed:
  • Marta Walentynowicz

    (University of Southern California
    KU Leuven)

  • Stefan Schneider

    (University of Southern California)

  • Doerte U. Junghaenel

    (University of Southern California)

  • Arthur A. Stone

    (University of Southern California
    University of Southern California)

Abstract

Comparison standards that people use when responding to survey questions, also called Frames of Reference (FoRs), can influence the validity of self-report responses. The effects of FoRs might be the strongest for items using vague quantifier (VQ) scales, which are particularly prominent in quality of life research, compared with numeric responses. This study aims to investigate the impact of FoRs on self-report measures by examining how imposing a specific FoR in survey questions affects (a) the response levels of VQ and numeric scales and (b) the relationship between VQs and a quantitative responses to the same question. A sample of 1869 respondents rated their education, commute and sleep duration, medication use, and level of physical activity using both VQ and numeric formats. Participants were asked to compare themselves with the average US adult, with their friends who are about their age, or did not receive specific instructions regarding a reference for comparison. We found that FoR conditions did not influence the numeric responses. Among the VQ responses, only education attainment was affected by FoR. The association between the numeric responses and vague quantifiers was comparable across different FoR conditions. Our results showed that manipulating the use of interpersonal FoRs had limited effect on the responses, which suggests that at least some comparisons do not have a strong biasing effect on self-report measures. However, future research should confirm this finding for using other FoRs (e.g., historical or hypothetical comparisons) and other outcome measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Marta Walentynowicz & Stefan Schneider & Doerte U. Junghaenel & Arthur A. Stone, 2022. "Vague Quantifiers Demonstrate Little Susceptibility to Frame of Reference Effects," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(1), pages 317-331, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ariqol:v:17:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11482-020-09889-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11482-020-09889-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11482-020-09889-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11482-020-09889-0?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Doerte U. Junghaenel & Joan E. Broderick & Stefan Schneider & Marcella May & Alicia Bolton & Kelly P. McCarrier & Larissa M. Stassek & Sarah C. Keithly & Arthur A. Stone, 2018. "Frames of Reference in Self-Reports of Health, Well-Being, Fatigue, and Pain: a Qualitative Examination," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 13(3), pages 585-601, September.
    2. Paul T E Cusack, 2020. "On Pain," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 31(3), pages 24253-24254, October.
    3. Kaplan, Giora & Baron-Epel, Orna, 2003. "What lies behind the subjective evaluation of health status?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(8), pages 1669-1676, April.
    4. Ania Filus & Doerte U. Junghaenel & Stefan Schneider & Joan E. Broderick & Arthur A. Stone, 2020. "Age Effects of Frames of Reference in Self-Reports of Health, Well-Being, Fatigue and Pain," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 15(1), pages 35-54, March.
    5. Berinsky, Adam J. & Huber, Gregory A. & Lenz, Gabriel S., 2012. "Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 351-368, July.
    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. Catherine P. Slade & Simon K. Medcalfe & C. Kevin Fortner & Kristin V. Walker, 2023. "Residential Segregation as a Policy Priority to Address Health Disparities: a Multilevel Analysis," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 18(4), pages 1715-1735, August.
    2. Ania Filus & Doerte U. Junghaenel & Stefan Schneider & Joan E. Broderick & Arthur A. Stone, 2020. "Age Effects of Frames of Reference in Self-Reports of Health, Well-Being, Fatigue and Pain," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 15(1), pages 35-54, March.
    3. Pan, Jing Yu & Liu, Dahai, 2022. "Mask-wearing intentions on airplanes during COVID-19 – Application of theory of planned behavior model," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 32-44.
    4. Michele Cantarella & Chiara Strozzi, 2021. "Workers in the crowd: the labor market impact of the online platform economy [An evaluation of instrumental variable strategies for estimating the effects of catholic schooling]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 30(6), pages 1429-1458.
    5. Robbett, Andrea & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2018. "Partisan bias and expressive voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-120.
    6. Daniel Niederer & Juliane Mueller, 2020. "Sustainability effects of motor control stabilisation exercises on pain and function in chronic nonspecific low back pain patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-21, January.
    7. Sana Sadiq & Khadija Anasse & Najib Slimani, 2022. "The impact of mobile phones on high school students: connecting the research dots," Technium Social Sciences Journal, Technium Science, vol. 30(1), pages 252-270, April.
    8. Jitka Vseteckova, 2020. "Psychological Therapy for ICT Literate Older Adults in the Time of COVID-19 - Perceptions on the Acceptability of Online Versus Face to Face Versions of a Mindfulness for Later Life Group," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 31(1), pages 23912-23916, October.
    9. Khalid Ahmed Al-Ansari & Ahmet Faruk Aysan, 2021. "More than ten years of Blockchain creation: How did we use the technology and which direction is the research heading? [Plus de dix ans de création Blockchain : Comment avons-nous utilisé la techno," Working Papers hal-03343048, HAL.
    10. Ling, Gabriel Hoh Teck & Suhud, Nur Amiera binti Md & Leng, Pau Chung & Yeo, Lee Bak & Cheng, Chin Tiong & Ahmad, Mohd Hamdan Haji & Matusin, AK Mohd Rafiq AK, 2021. "Factors Influencing Asia-Pacific Countries’ Success Level in Curbing COVID-19: A Review Using a Social–Ecological System (SES) Framework," SocArXiv b9f2w, Center for Open Science.
    11. Benedict E. DeDominicis, 2021. "Multinational Enterprises And Economic Nationalism: A Strategic Analysis Of Culture," Global Journal of Business Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 15(1), pages 19-66.
    12. Robert J. R. Elliott & Ingmar Schumacher & Cees Withagen, 2020. "Suggestions for a Covid-19 Post-Pandemic Research Agenda in Environmental Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 1187-1213, August.
    13. Rafał Krupiński, 2020. "Virtual Reality System and Scientific Visualisation for Smart Designing and Evaluating of Lighting," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    14. Park, JungKun & Ahn, Jiseon & Thavisay, Toulany & Ren, Tianbao, 2019. "Examining the role of anxiety and social influence in multi-benefits of mobile payment service," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 140-149.
    15. Werner Hölzl & Michael Böheim & Klaus Friesenbichler & Agnes Kügler & Thomas Leoni, 2021. "Staatliche Hilfsmaßnahmen für Unternehmen in der COVID-19-Krise. Eine begleitende Analyse operativer Aspekte und Unternehmenseinschätzungen," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 66624, January.
    16. Thorbecke, Willem & Chen, Chen & Salike, Nimesh, 2021. "China’s exports in a protectionist world," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    17. Chunhao Wei & Han Chen & Yee Ming Lee, 2022. "COVID-19 preventive measures and restaurant customers’ intention to dine out: the role of brand trust and perceived risk," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 16(3), pages 581-600, September.
    18. Óscar Chiva-Bartoll & Honorato Morente-Oria & Francisco Tomás González-Fernández & Pedro Jesús Ruiz-Montero, 2020. "Anxiety and Bodily Pain in Older Women Participants in a Physical Education Program. A Multiple Moderated Mediation Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-12, May.
    19. Gigi Foster, 2020. "The behavioural economics of government responses to COVID-19," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S3), pages 11-43, December.
    20. Reza Salajegheh & Edward C Nemergut & Terran M Rice & Roy Joseph & Siny Tsang & Bethany M Sarosiek & C Paige Muthusubramanian & Katelyn M Hipwell & Kate B Horton & Bhiken I Naik, 2020. "Impact of a perioperative oral opioid substitution protocol during the nationwide intravenous opioid shortage: A single center, interrupted time series with segmented regression analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-13, June.

    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:spr:ariqol:v:17:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11482-020-09889-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.