IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/touman/v59y2017icp376-384.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A critique of “Response Bias” in the tourism, travel and hospitality research

Author

Listed:
  • Yüksel, Atila

Abstract

Measurement accuracy of respondents' opinions, perceptions, attitudes and behaviors is vital for better managerial suggestions, theoretical conclusions and advancement of science. There is a growing concern, voiced frequently in other disciplines that a high rate of response bias exists and this casts serious doubts on generalizability of conclusions. Based on limited research on the topic, this paper examines the extent to which response bias is acknowledged as a limitation in tourism, travel and hospitality research. Additional analyses were carried out to explore i) researchers' attentiveness to cautions when citing a biased study and ii) editorial policies of journals against bias. The results revealed that i) acknowledgement of response bias was low, ii) that researchers’ negligence to reported response bias limitations was high, and iii) that editorial policies of the examined journals were far from encouraging authors to discuss and include response bias related limitations. Implications were discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Yüksel, Atila, 2017. "A critique of “Response Bias” in the tourism, travel and hospitality research," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 376-384.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:touman:v:59:y:2017:i:c:p:376-384
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2016.08.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261517716301443
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.08.003?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. John P A Ioannidis, 2005. "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(8), pages 1-1, August.
    2. Weijters, Bert & Cabooter, Elke & Schillewaert, Niels, 2010. "The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 236-247.
    3. Bagozzi, Richard P & Yi, Youjae, 1991. "Multitrait-Multimethod Matrices in Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 17(4), pages 426-439, March.
    4. John R. Rossiter, 2011. "Measurement for the Social Sciences," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-1-4419-7158-6, June.
    5. Vera Toepoel & Corrie Vis & Marcel Das & Arthur van Soest, 2009. "Design of Web Questionnaires," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 37(3), pages 371-392, February.
    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. Maksim Godovykh & Carissa Baker & Alan Fyall, 2022. "VR in Tourism: A New Call for Virtual Tourism Experience amid and after the COVID-19 Pandemic," Tourism and Hospitality, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-11, February.
    2. Shehnaz Tehseen, T. Ramayah, Sulaiman Sajilan, 2017. "Testing and Controlling for Common Method Variance: A Review of Available Methods," Journal of Management Sciences, Geist Science, Iqra University, Faculty of Business Administration, vol. 4(2), pages 146-175, October.

    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. 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. Cabooter, Elke & Weijters, Bert & Geuens, Maggie & Vermeir, Iris, 2016. "Scale format effects on response option interpretation and use," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2574-2584.
    3. Weijters, Bert & Millet, Kobe & Cabooter, Elke, 2021. "Extremity in horizontal and vertical Likert scale format responses. Some evidence on how visual distance between response categories influences extreme responding," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 85-103.
    4. Eline Moens & Louis Lippens & Philippe Sterkens & Johannes Weytjens & Stijn Baert, 2022. "The COVID-19 crisis and telework: a research survey on experiences, expectations and hopes," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(4), pages 729-753, June.
    5. Alexander Frankel & Maximilian Kasy, 2022. "Which Findings Should Be Published?," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 1-38, February.
    6. Jyotirmoy Sarkar, 2018. "Will P†Value Triumph over Abuses and Attacks?," Biostatistics and Biometrics Open Access Journal, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 7(4), pages 66-71, July.
    7. Stanley, T. D. & Doucouliagos, Chris, 2019. "Practical Significance, Meta-Analysis and the Credibility of Economics," IZA Discussion Papers 12458, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Ahrholdt, Dennis C. & Gudergan, Siegfried P. & Ringle, Christian M., 2019. "Enhancing loyalty: When improving consumer satisfaction and delight matters," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 18-27.
    9. Karin Langenkamp & Bodo Rödel & Kerstin Taufenbach & Meike Weiland, 2018. "Open Access in Vocational Education and Training Research," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-12, July.
    10. Kevin J. Boyle & Mark Morrison & Darla Hatton MacDonald & Roderick Duncan & John Rose, 2016. "Investigating Internet and Mail Implementation of Stated-Preference Surveys While Controlling for Differences in Sample Frames," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(3), pages 401-419, July.
    11. XiaoJuan Zhang & Xiang Jinpeng & Farhan Khan, 2020. "The Influence of Social Media on Employee’s Knowledge Sharing Motivation: A Two-Factor Theory Perspective," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, July.
    12. Stylos, Nikolaos & Vassiliadis, Chris A. & Bellou, Victoria & Andronikidis, Andreas, 2016. "Destination images, holistic images and personal normative beliefs: Predictors of intention to revisit a destination," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 40-60.
    13. Jelte M Wicherts & Marjan Bakker & Dylan Molenaar, 2011. "Willingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-7, November.
    14. Valentine, Kathrene D & Buchanan, Erin Michelle & Scofield, John E. & Beauchamp, Marshall T., 2017. "Beyond p-values: Utilizing Multiple Estimates to Evaluate Evidence," OSF Preprints 9hp7y, Center for Open Science.
    15. Anton, Roman, 2014. "Sustainable Intrapreneurship - The GSI Concept and Strategy - Unfolding Competitive Advantage via Fair Entrepreneurship," MPRA Paper 69713, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 Feb 2015.
    16. Elke Cabooter & Bert Weijters & Alain Beuckelaer & Eldad Davidov, 2017. "Is extreme response style domain specific? Findings from two studies in four countries," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2605-2622, November.
    17. Dudek, Thomas & Brenøe, Anne Ardila & Feld, Jan & Rohrer, Julia, 2022. "No Evidence That Siblings' Gender Affects Personality across Nine Countries," IZA Discussion Papers 15137, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Uwe Hassler & Marc‐Oliver Pohle, 2022. "Unlucky Number 13? Manipulating Evidence Subject to Snooping," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 90(2), pages 397-410, August.
    19. Muhammad Shaukat Malik, Sabah Younus, 2019. "Determinants of Tax-Compliance Behaviour Explored by Slippery Slope Framework and Theory of Planned Behaviour: An Evidence from Small Business Owner," Journal of Management Sciences, Geist Science, Iqra University, Faculty of Business Administration, vol. 6(2), pages 33-47, October.
    20. Frederique Bordignon, 2020. "Self-correction of science: a comparative study of negative citations and post-publication peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1225-1239, August.

    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:eee:touman:v:59:y:2017:i:c:p:376-384. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/tourism-management .

    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.