IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sgm/pzwzuw/v14i60y2016p102-116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparability Problems of International Survey Data: The Example of Japan and Italy (Problem porownywalnosci danych sondazowych pochodzacych z roznych krajow: przyklad Japonii i W³och)

Author

Listed:
  • Jerzy Wierzbinski

    (University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management)

  • Anna Olga Kuzminska

    (University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management)

Abstract

The paper shows problems of comparability of data collected in Italy and Japan, which can be treated as proxies of Western and Eastern cultures, respectively. Following the theoretical and empirical comparison of these two cultures performed by Nisbett (2003), we predicted and tested the differences in the response styles on Italian and Japanese representative internet samples, as well as data collected in both countries as part of the International Social Survey Programme (1998, 2008). In almost all of the six question sets analyzed, the Japanese gave fewer extreme responses, as well as more “don’t know” responses than Italians.

Suggested Citation

  • Jerzy Wierzbinski & Anna Olga Kuzminska, 2016. "Comparability Problems of International Survey Data: The Example of Japan and Italy (Problem porownywalnosci danych sondazowych pochodzacych z roznych krajow: przyklad Japonii i W³och)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 14(60), pages 102-116.
    • Handle: RePEc:sgm:pzwzuw:v:14:i:60:y:2016:p:102-116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://pz.wz.uw.edu.pl/sites/default/files/artykuly/pz_2016_2_2_wierzbinski_kuzminska.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://pz.wz.uw.edu.pl/en
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Herk, H. & Poortinga, Y.H. & Verhallen, T.M.M., 2004. "Response styles in rating scales : Evidence of method bias in data from 6 EU countries," Other publications TiSEM c8befc7a-f2f4-44cf-b2fc-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    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. Sergio Cesare Masin & Michele Vicovaro, 2023. "Sources of uncertainty in functional measurement methodology," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 1185-1205, April.
    2. Gerhard Tutz & Moritz Berger, 2016. "Response Styles in Rating Scales," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 41(3), pages 239-268, June.
    3. Jerzy Wierzbinski & Anna O. Kuzminska & Grzegorz Krol, 2014. "Konsekwencje wyboru typu skali odpowiedzi w badaniach ankietowych (Consequences of using different types of rating scales)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 12(45), pages 113-136.
    4. Andre A. Pekerti & Denni Arli, 2017. "Do Cultural and Generational Cohorts Matter to Ideologies and Consumer Ethics? A Comparative Study of Australians, Indonesians, and Indonesian Migrants in Australia," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 387-404, June.
    5. Alain Beuckelaer & Machiel Zeeman & Hans Trijp, 2015. "Assessment of the cross-national validity of an End-anchored 9-point hedonic product liking scale," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 1267-1286, May.
    6. Piotr Białowolski, 2016. "The influence of negative response style on survey-based household inflation expectations," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 509-528, March.
    7. Aurélie Bertrand & Christian Hafner, 2014. "On heterogeneous latent class models with applications to the analysis of rating scores," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 307-330, February.
    8. Tellis, Gerard J. & Chandrasekaran, Deepa, 2010. "Extent and impact of response biases in cross-national survey research," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 329-341.
    9. Leonard J. Paas & Meike Morren, 2018. "PLease do not answer if you are reading this: respondent attention in online panels," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 13-21, March.
    10. Mary Margaret Rogers & Robert A. Peterson & Gerald Albaum, 2013. "Measuring Business Related Ethicality Globally: Cultural Emic Or Etic?," International Journal of Management and Marketing Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 6(1), pages 1-14.
    11. Douglas A. Hershey & Kène Henkens & Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2006. "Mapping the Minds of Retirement Planners," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 06-038/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Anne Thissen-Roe & David Thissen, 2013. "A Two-Decision Model for Responses to Likert-Type Items," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 38(5), pages 522-547, October.
    13. Mai, Robert & Hutter, Katharina, 2014. "Non-Linear Effects of Absurdity in Advertising," EconStor Preprints 96480, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    14. Anne-Wil Harzing & Michelle Brown & Kathrin Köster & Shuming Zhao, 2012. "Response Style Differences in Cross-National Research," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 341-363, June.
    15. Shaw, Duncan & Smith, Chris M. & Scully, Judy, 2017. "Why did Brexit happen? Using causal mapping to analyse secondary, longitudinal data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 263(3), pages 1019-1032.
    16. Hsien-Hua Yu & Ru-Ping Hu & Mei-Lien Chen, 2022. "Global Pandemic Prevention Continual Learning—Taking Online Learning as an Example: The Relevance of Self-Regulation, Mind-Unwandered, and Online Learning Ineffectiveness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-14, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    “don’t know” responses; extreme responses; International Social Survey Programme; eastwest cultural differences; Japan; Nisbett;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General

    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:sgm:pzwzuw:v:14:i:60:y:2016:p:102-116. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/somuwpl.html .

    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.