IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v58y2024i6d10.1007_s11135-024-01891-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Agree to agree: correcting acquiescence bias in the case of fully unbalanced scales with application to UK measurements of political beliefs

Author

Listed:
  • Phil Swatton

    (University of Essex)

Abstract

A methodologically important area in political science is measuring the ideology of voters. This task can be difficult, and researchers often rely on ‘off the shelf’ datasets. Many of these datasets contain unbalanced Likert scales, which risk acquiescence bias. This paper proposes a strategy for dealing with this issue. I first demonstrate using two comparable datasets from the UK how unbalanced scales produce distorted distributions and can affect regression results. Then, building on past research that utilises factor analysis to eliminate the influence of acquiescence bias, I demonstrate how researchers can utilise a person intercept confirmatory factor analysis model to obtain factor scores corrected for acquiescence in the case of fully unbalanced scales. I conclude with practical recommendations for researchers and survey designers moving forward.

Suggested Citation

  • Phil Swatton, 2024. "Agree to agree: correcting acquiescence bias in the case of fully unbalanced scales with application to UK measurements of political beliefs," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 58(6), pages 5463-5482, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:58:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s11135-024-01891-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-024-01891-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-024-01891-0
    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/s11135-024-01891-0?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.

    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:58:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s11135-024-01891-0. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.