IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v56y2022i3d10.1007_s11135-021-01183-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Number of answer categories for bipolar item specific scales in face-to-face surveys: Does more mean better?

Author

Listed:
  • Marc Asensio

    (Universitat Pompeu Fabra)

  • Melanie Revilla

    (Universitat Pompeu Fabra)

Abstract

Since decades, surveys have been the main source of data in a considerable amount of studies. Designing surveys implies taking many decisions which affect the data quality and thus the results. In this paper, we focus on one of these decisions: the number of answer categories in bipolar closed-ended item specific attitudinal questions. We investigate the measurement quality (product of reliability and validity) of such scales using data from three Multitrait-Multimethod experiments implemented in the European Survey Social (face-to-face): two about social trust (rounds 1 and 4), and one about immigration (round 6). Data are analyzed using the Estimation Using Pooled Data procedure (Saris and Satorra in Struct. Equ. Modeling 25(5): 659–672, 2018). The results show that, out of the three scales tested, the 11-point scale has higher quality in the immigration experiment whereas in the social trust experiments, the 6-point is the one with the highest quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Marc Asensio & Melanie Revilla, 2022. "Number of answer categories for bipolar item specific scales in face-to-face surveys: Does more mean better?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1413-1433, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:56:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s11135-021-01183-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-021-01183-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-021-01183-x
    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/s11135-021-01183-x?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. Anna DeCastellarnau, 2018. "A classification of response scale characteristics that affect data quality: a literature review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1523-1559, July.
    2. Diana Zavala-Rojas & Willem E. Saris, 2018. "Measurement Invariance in Multilingual Survey Research: The Role of the Language of the Questionnaire," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 485-510, November.
    3. Willem E. Saris & Melanie Revilla, 2016. "Correction for Measurement Errors in Survey Research: Necessary and Possible," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 1005-1020, 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. Felderer, Barbara & Repke, Lydia & Weber, Wiebke & Schweisthal, jonas & Bothmann, Ludwig, 2024. "Predicting the Validity and Reliability of Survey Questions," OSF Preprints hkngd, Center for Open Science.
    2. Niculaescu, Corina E. & Sangiorgi, Ivan & Bell, Adrian R., 2023. "Does personal experience with COVID-19 impact investment decisions? Evidence from a survey of US retail investors," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    3. S. Brent Jackson & Kathryn T. Stevenson & Lincoln R. Larson & M. Nils Peterson & Erin Seekamp, 2021. "Outdoor Activity Participation Improves Adolescents’ Mental Health and Well-Being during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-18, March.
    4. Jon Roozenbeek & Stefan M. Herzog & Michael Geers & Ralf Kurvers & Mubashir Sultan & Sander van der Linden, 2022. "Susceptibility to misinformation is consistent across question framings and response modes and better explained by myside bias and partisanship than analytical thinking," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 17(3), pages 547-573, May.
    5. Melanie Revilla & Jan Karem Höhne & Tobias Rettig, 2023. "Differences in measurement quality depending on recall: results for a question about trust in the parliament," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 2125-2146, June.
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:3:p:547-573 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Choi, Young Rok & Phan, Phillip H. & Choi, Jaepil, 2020. "Formal governance, interfirm coordination, and performance in partnerships: An empirical investigation of a mediation model," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 413-424.
    8. Ken Cai Kowalski & Andrew J. Perrin, 2024. "“I have to pick a percentage now”: indeterminate meanings of moderate survey responses," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 3041-3061, August.
    9. Aarti Sharma & Taghreed Abunada & Sawsan S. Said & Rana M. Kurdi & Atiyeh M. Abdallah & Marawan Abu-Madi, 2022. "Clinical Practicum Assessment for Biomedical Science Program from Graduates’ Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-10, September.
    10. Karen Gorissen & Bert Weijters & Berre Deltomme, 2024. "Green versus Grey Framing: Exploring the Mechanism behind the Negative Footprint Illusion in Environmental Sustainability Assessments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-10, February.
    11. S. Brent Jackson & Kathryn T. Stevenson & Lincoln R. Larson & M. Nils Peterson & Erin Seekamp, 2021. "Connection to Nature Boosts Adolescents’ Mental Well-Being during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-24, November.
    12. Stefania Capecchi & Romina Gambacorta & Rosaria Simone & Domenico Piccolo, 2024. "Modelling cognitive response patterns to survey questions using the class of CUB models," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 885, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    13. Giovana Vitória Nunes Leite Duarte & Susana Pereira Antunes Procópio & Angélica Cotta Lobo Leite Carneiro & Leandro de Morais Cardoso, 2022. "Development and Validation of a Tool for Assessing Sustainable Social Practices in Food Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-18, December.
    14. Arne Weigold & Ingrid K. Weigold & Migyeong Jang & Emily M. Thornton, 2022. "College students’ and Mechanical Turk workers’ environmental factors while completing online surveys," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 2589-2612, August.
    15. André Pirralha & Wiebke Weber, 2020. "Correction for measurement error in invariance testing: An illustration using SQP," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, October.
    16. Wonyoung Yang & Hyeun Jun Moon & Jin Yong Jeon, 2019. "Comparison of Response Scales as Measures of Indoor Environmental Perception in Combined Thermal and Acoustic Conditions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-26, July.
    17. Piotr Tarka, 2018. "An overview of structural equation modeling: its beginnings, historical development, usefulness and controversies in the social sciences," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 313-354, January.
    18. David Fortunato & Matthew V. Hibbing & Tessa Provins, 2022. "Hurdles to inference: The demographic correlates of survey breakoff and shirking," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(2), pages 455-465, March.
    19. Konstantin Gavras & Jan Karem Höhne & Annelies G. Blom & Harald Schoen, 2022. "Innovating the collection of open‐ended answers: The linguistic and content characteristics of written and oral answers to political attitude questions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(3), pages 872-890, July.
    20. Wonyoung Yang & Jin Yong Jeon, 2021. "Usability of Visual Analogue Scales in Assessing Human Perception of Sound with University Students Using a Web-Based Tablet Interface," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.
    21. Zhou, Fei & Su, Qiulai & Mou, Jian, 2021. "Understanding the effect of website logos as animated spokescharacters on the advertising: A lens of parasocial interaction relationship," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).

    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:qualqt:v:56:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s11135-021-01183-x. 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.