IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v103y2022i2p455-465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hurdles to inference: The demographic correlates of survey breakoff and shirking

Author

Listed:
  • David Fortunato
  • Matthew V. Hibbing
  • Tessa Provins

Abstract

Objective Various shirking behaviors in survey‐taking can inhibit researchers' ability to draw unbiased inferences from the resulting data. We define three types of shirking behavior, identify their demographic correlates among survey respondents, show how shirking may lead to biased or incorrect inferences, and offer suggestions for navigating these threats. Methods We analyze responses from a large (N=3,256), representative survey of Americans, identify indicators of three types of shirking, and regress these indicators on survey firm administrative data on respondent characteristics to discover the respondent characteristics associated with different shirking types. Results The data suggest women are more likely to break off during a survey, while men are more likely to shirk while completing the instrument. In addition, young, less educated respondents are more likely to use straight‐lining or other satisficing tactics. Conclusion Systematic differences in shirking behaviors across these demographic groups make us likely to misunderstand the (reported) social behavior of women and men, young and old, or more and less educated, indifferent ways. This is particularly problematic for testing behavioral theories that generate gender, age, or education‐specific predictions, or, predictions regarding attitudes or behaviors that strongly correlated to these characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:103:y:2022:i:2:p:455-465
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13128
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13128?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. 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. Duch,Raymond M. & Stevenson,Randolph T., 2008. "The Economic Vote," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521707404, November.
    3. Duch,Raymond M. & Stevenson,Randolph T., 2008. "The Economic Vote," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521881029, November.
    4. Markus Prior & Arthur Lupia, 2008. "Money, Time, and Political Knowledge: Distinguishing Quick Recall and Political Learning Skills," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(1), pages 169-183, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Henning Silber & Patricia Moy & Timothy P Johnson & Rico Neumann & Sven Stadtmüller & Lydia Repke, 2022. "Survey participation as a function of democratic engagement, trust in institutions, and perceptions of surveys," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(7), pages 1619-1632, December.

    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. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    2. Herrera, Helios & Konradt, Maximilian & Ordoñez, Guillermo & Trebesch, Christoph, 2020. "Corona politics: The cost of mismanaging pandemics," Kiel Working Papers 2165, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    3. George Ward, 2015. "Is Happiness a Predictor of Election Results?," CEP Discussion Papers dp1343, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    4. Pedro C. Magalhães & Luís Aguiar-Conraria, 2017. "Procedural Fairness and Economic Voting," NIPE Working Papers 07/2017, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    5. Dominik Schraff & Frank Schimmelfennig, 2019. "Eurozone bailouts and national democracy: Detachment or resilience?," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(3), pages 361-383, September.
    6. Michael Becher & Nicolas Longuet Marx & Vincent Pons & Sylvain Brouard & Martial Foucault & Vincenzo Galasso & Eric Kerrouche & Sandra León Alfonso & Daniel Stegmueller, 2021. "Government Performance and Democracy: Survey Experimental Evidence from 12 Countries during Covid-19," NBER Working Papers 29514, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Christopher R. Ellis & Joseph Daniel Ura, 2021. "Polarization and the Decline of Economic Voting in American National Elections," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 83-89, January.
    8. Colantone, Italo & Ottaviano, Gianmarco & Stanig, Piero, 2021. "The backlash of globalization," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113860, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Jonathon M. Clegg, 2016. "Perception vs Reality: How Does The British Electorate Evaluate Economic Performance of Incumbent Governments In The Post War Period?," Oxford Economic and Social History Working Papers _143, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    10. Wahman, Michael & Basedau, Matthias, 2015. "Electoral Rentierism? The Cross-National and Subnational Effect of Oil on Electoral Competitiveness in Multiparty Autocracies," GIGA Working Papers 272, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    11. Pulejo, Massimo & Querubín, Pablo, 2021. "Electoral concerns reduce restrictive measures during the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    12. Falcó-Gimeno, Albert & Jurado, Ignacio, 2011. "Minority governments and budget deficits: The role of the opposition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 554-565, September.
    13. Scott Gates & Mogens K. Justesen, 2020. "Political Trust, Shocks, and Accountability: Quasi-experimental Evidence from a Rebel Attack," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 64(9), pages 1693-1723, October.
    14. Maggie E. C. Jones & Morten Ørregaard Nielsen & Michał Ksawery Popiel, 2014. "A fractionally cointegrated VAR analysis of economic voting and political support," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(4), pages 1078-1130, November.
    15. Nicolae-Marius JULA, 2010. "Regional Analyses Of Voting Behaviour In Romania –Local, General And Presidential Elections," Romanian Journal of Regional Science, Romanian Regional Science Association, vol. 4(2), pages 62-77, DECEMBER.
    16. Helios Herrera & Guillermo Ordoñez & Christoph Trebesch, 2020. "Political Booms, Financial Crises," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(2), pages 507-543.
    17. Hamilton, Alexander, 2013. "Small is beautiful, at least in high-income democracies: the distribution of policy-making responsibility, electoral accountability, and incentives for rent extraction," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6305, The World Bank.
    18. repec:gig:joupla:v:5:y:2013:i:2:p:3-35 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Abel Bojar, 2015. "Biting the Hand that Feeds: Reconsidering Partisanship in an Age of Permanent Austerity," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 91, European Institute, LSE.
    20. Michael Lewis-Beck & Mary Stegmaier, 2013. "The VP-function revisited: a survey of the literature on vote and popularity functions after over 40 years," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 367-385, December.
    21. Mikhail A Alexseev & Henry E Hale, 2020. "Crimea come what may: Do economic sanctions backfire politically?," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(2), pages 344-359, 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:socsci:v:103:y:2022:i:2:p:455-465. 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: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    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.