IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v52y2018i4d10.1007_s11135-017-0533-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A classification of response scale characteristics that affect data quality: a literature review

Author

Listed:
  • Anna DeCastellarnau

    (RECSM-Universitat Pompeu Fabra
    Tilburg University)

Abstract

Quite a lot of research is available on the relationships between survey response scales’ characteristics and the quality of responses. However, it is often difficult to extract practical rules for questionnaire design from the wide and often mixed amount of empirical evidence. The aim of this study is to provide first a classification of the characteristics of response scales, mentioned in the literature, that should be considered when developing a scale, and second a summary of the main conclusions extracted from the literature regarding the impact these characteristics have on data quality. Thus, this paper provides an updated and detailed classification of the design decisions that matter in questionnaire development, and a summary of what is said in the literature about their impact on data quality. It distinguishes between characteristics that have been demonstrated to have an impact, characteristics for which the impact has not been found, and characteristics for which research is still needed to make a conclusion.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:52:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s11135-017-0533-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-017-0533-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-017-0533-4
    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/s11135-017-0533-4?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Toepoel, V. & Das, J.W.M. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2006. "Design of Web Questionnaires : The Effect of Layout in Rating Scales," Discussion Paper 2006-30, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    3. McKEE J. McCLENDON, 1991. "Acquiescence and Recency Response-Order Effects in Interview Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 20(1), pages 60-103, August.
    4. Melanie A. Revilla & Willem E. Saris & Jon A. Krosnick, 2014. "Choosing the Number of Categories in Agree–Disagree Scales," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 43(1), pages 73-97, February.
    5. Leah Melani Christian & Nicholas L. Parsons & Don A. Dillman, 2009. "Designing Scalar Questions for Web Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 37(3), pages 393-425, February.
    6. Duane F. Alwin, 1997. "Feeling Thermometers Versus 7-Point Scales," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 25(3), pages 318-340, February.
    7. John R. Rossiter, 2011. "Measurement for the Social Sciences," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-1-4419-7158-6, March.
    8. K. Levin & C. Currie, 2014. "Reliability and Validity of an Adapted Version of the Cantril Ladder for Use with Adolescent Samples," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 119(2), pages 1047-1063, November.
    9. 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.
    10. McKEE J. McCLENDON & DUANE F. ALWIN, 1993. "No-Opinion Filters and Attitude Measurement Reliability," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 21(4), pages 438-464, May.
    11. 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)

    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. 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.
    2. Yüksel, Atila, 2017. "A critique of “Response Bias” in the tourism, travel and hospitality research," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 376-384.
    3. Agnalys Michaud & Oriol Bosch & Nicolas Sauger, 2023. "Can Survey Scales Affect What People Report as A Fair Income? Evidence From the Cross-National Probability-Based Online Panel CRONOS," Post-Print hal-04216639, HAL.
    4. Bart Buelens & Jan A. van den Brakel, 2015. "Measurement Error Calibration in Mixed-mode Sample Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 44(3), pages 391-426, August.
    5. Dana Garbarski & Nora Cate Schaeffer & Jennifer Dykema, 2019. "The Effects of Features of Survey Measurement on Self-Rated Health: Response Option Order and Scale Orientation," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 14(2), pages 545-560, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Brauner, Jacob, 2020. "Are Smileys Valid Answers? Survey Data Quality with Innovative Item Formats," SocArXiv dk9bc, Center for Open Science.
    8. 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.
    9. Zsuzsa Lábiscsák-Erdélyi & Ilona Veres-Balajti & Annamária Somhegyi & Karolina Kósa, 2022. "Self-Esteem Is Independent Factor and Moderator of School-Related Psychosocial Determinants of Life Satisfaction in Adolescents," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-14, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Andreas Jørgensen & Christina Bjørk Petersen & Martin Eghøj & Mette Toftager, 2021. "When Movement Moves: Study Protocol for a Multi-Method Pre/Post Evaluation Study of Two Programmes; the Danish Team Twin and Cycling Without Age," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-24, September.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Anna Jasinenko & Josephina Steuber, 2023. "Perceived Organizational Purpose: Systematic Literature Review, Construct Definition, Measurement and Potential Employee Outcomes," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(6), pages 1415-1447, September.
    16. Indera Ratna Irawati Pattinasarany, 2024. "Happiness amidst the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia: exploring gender, residence type, and pandemic severity," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    17. Natalja Menold & Vera Toepoel, 2024. "Do Different Devices Perform Equally Well with Different Numbers of Scale Points and Response Formats? A test of measurement invariance and reliability," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 53(2), pages 898-939, May.
    18. Md. Mahabub Alom, 2025. "Halal Food Products Adoption in Bangladesh: A Study Based on the Theory of Reasoned Action," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 9(14), pages 795-806, April.
    19. Yekaterina Chzhen & Irene Moor & William Pickett & Emilia Toczydlowska & Gonneke Stevens & UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, 2016. "Family Affluence and Inequality in Adolescent Health and Life Satisfaction: Evidence from the HBSC study 2002-2014," Papers inwopa836, Innocenti Working Papers.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:spr:qualqt:v:52:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s11135-017-0533-4. 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.