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. McKEE J. McCLENDON, 1991. "Acquiescence and Recency Response-Order Effects in Interview Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 20(1), pages 60-103, August.
    3. Duane F. Alwin, 1997. "Feeling Thermometers Versus 7-Point Scales," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 25(3), pages 318-340, February.
    4. John R. Rossiter, 2011. "Measurement for the Social Sciences," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-1-4419-7158-6, October.
    5. Toepoel, V. & Das, J.W.M. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2006. "Design of Web Questionnaires : The Effect of Layout in Rating Scales," Other publications TiSEM 9401f6c5-0275-400e-ac97-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. McKEE J. McCLENDON & DUANE F. ALWIN, 1993. "No-Opinion Filters and Attitude Measurement Reliability," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 21(4), pages 438-464, May.
    7. Vera Toepoel & Corrie Vis & Marcel Das & Arthur van Soest, 2009. "Design of Web Questionnaires," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 37(3), pages 371-392, February.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Brauner, Jacob, 2020. "Are Smileys Valid Answers? Survey Data Quality with Innovative Item Formats," SocArXiv dk9bc, Center for Open Science.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Maja Gajda & Agnieszka Małkowska-Szkutnik & Wojciech Rodzeń, 2022. "Self-Regulation in Adolescents: Polish Adaptation and Validation of the Self-Regulation Scale," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-19, June.
    15. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2011. "Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(4), pages 309-351, September.
    16. Diana Frasquilho & Margarida Gaspar Matos & Candace Currie & Fergus Neville & Ross Whitehead & Tânia Gaspar & JM Caldas de Almeida, 2017. "Young People Living with Unemployed Parents during a Labour Market-Crisis: How Do Portugal and Scotland Compare?," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 10(4), pages 1135-1144, December.
    17. Hengky Latan & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, 2021. "To Blow or Not to Blow the Whistle: The Role of Rationalization in the Perceived Seriousness of Threats and Wrongdoing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 517-535, March.
    18. Sandra Cortés & Soledad Burgos & Héctor Adaros & Boris Lucero & Lesliam Quirós-Alcalá, 2021. "Environmental Health Risk Perception: Adaptation of a Population-Based Questionnaire from Latin America," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-13, August.
    19. Stylos, Nikolaos & Bellou, Victoria & Andronikidis, Andreas & Vassiliadis, Chris A., 2017. "Linking the dots among destination images, place attachment, and revisit intentions: A study among British and Russian tourists," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 15-29.
    20. Werner Bönte & Sandro Lombardo & Diemo Urbig, 2016. "Economics meets Psychology:Experimental and self-reported Measures of Individual Competitiveness," Schumpeter Discussion Papers SDP16006, Universitätsbibliothek Wuppertal, University Library.

    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.