IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cen/wpaper/16-53.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Management and Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS): Cognitive Testing

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine Buffington
  • Kenny Herrell
  • Scott Ohlmacher

Abstract

All Census Bureau surveys must meet quality standards before they can be sent to the public for data collection. This paper outlines the pretesting process that was used to ensure that the Management and Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS) met those standards. The MOPS is the first large survey of management practices at U.S. manufacturing establishments. The first wave of the MOPS, issued for reference year 2010, was subject to internal expert review and two rounds of cognitive interviews. The results of this pretesting were used to make significant changes to the MOPS instrument and ensure that quality data was collected. The second wave of the MOPS, featuring new questions on data in decision making (DDD) and uncertainty and issued for reference year 2015, was subject to two rounds of cognitive interviews and a round of usability testing. This paper illustrates the effort undertaken by the Census Bureau to ensure that all surveys released into the field are of high quality and provides insight into how respondents interpret the MOPS questionnaire for those looking to utilize the MOPS data.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine Buffington & Kenny Herrell & Scott Ohlmacher, 2016. "The Management and Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS): Cognitive Testing," Working Papers 16-53, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    • Handle: RePEc:cen:wpaper:16-53
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www2.census.gov/ces/wp/2016/CES-WP-16-53.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2016
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catherine Buffington & Lucia Foster & Ron Jarmin & Scott Ohlmacher, 2016. "The Management and Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS): An Overview," Working Papers 16-28, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    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. Norris Keiller, Agnes & de Paula, Aureo & Van Reenen, John, 2024. "Production function estimation using subjective expectations data," CEPR Discussion Papers 19259, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Kim, Minho & Chung, Sunghoon & Lee, Changkeun, 2019. "Smart Policies for Smart Factories," KDI Focus 97, Korea Development Institute (KDI).
    3. Bloom, Nicholas & Brynjolfsson, Erik & Foster, Lucia & Jarmin, Ron & Patnaik, Megha & Saporta-Eksten, Itay & Van Reenen, John, 2017. "What Drives Differences in Management?," IZA Discussion Papers 10724, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Nicholas Bloom & Erik Brynjolfsson & Lucia Foster & Ron Jarmin & Megha Patnaik & Itay Saporta-Eksten & John Van Reenen, 2019. "What Drives Differences in Management Practices?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(5), pages 1648-1683, May.
    5. Nicholas Bloom & Stephen J. Davis & Lucia Foster & Brian Lucking & Scott Ohlmacher & Itay Saporta Eksten, 2020. "Business-Level Expectations and Uncertainty," Working Papers 2020-181, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    6. Catherine Buffington & Andrew Hennessy & Scott Ohlmacher, 2018. "The Management and Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS): Collection and Processing," Working Papers 18-51, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.

    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. Enghin Atalay & Ali Hortaçsu & Mary Jialin Li & Chad Syverson, 2019. "How Wide Is the Firm Border?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(4), pages 1845-1882.
    2. Brent Meyer & Emil Mihaylov & Steven J. Davis & Nicholas Parker & David Altig & Jose Maria Barrero & Nicholas Bloom, 2020. "Pandemic-Era Uncertainty on Main Street and Wall Street," Working Papers 2020-189, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    3. Nathan Goldschlag & Elisabeth Perlman, 2017. "Business Dynamic Statistics of Innovative Firms," Working Papers 17-72, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    4. Ohlsbom, Roope, 2021. "Management Practices Drive Productivity – But Not Without Human Capital," ETLA Working Papers 88, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    5. Nicholas Bloom & Erik Brynjolfsson & Lucia Foster & Ron Jarmin & Megha Patnaik & Itay Saporta-Eksten & John Van Reenen, 2017. "What drives differences in management?," CEP Discussion Papers dp1470, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    6. Kim, Minho & Chung, Sunghoon & Lee, Changkeun, 2019. "Smart Policies for Smart Factories," KDI Focus 97, Korea Development Institute (KDI).
    7. Agnes Norris Keiller & Áureo de Paula & John Van Reenen, 2024. "Production function estimation using subjective expectations data," CeMMAP working papers 15/24, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    8. Alice Zawacki & Scott Ohlmacher & Struther Van Horn, 2021. "Developing Content for the Management and Organizational Practices Survey-Hospitals (MOPS-HP)," Working Papers 21-25, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    9. Norris Keiller, Agnes & de Paula, Aureo & Van Reenen, John, 2024. "Production function estimation using subjective expectations data," CEPR Discussion Papers 19259, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Nicholas Bloom & Stephen J. Davis & Lucia Foster & Brian Lucking & Scott Ohlmacher & Itay Saporta Eksten, 2020. "Business-Level Expectations and Uncertainty," Working Papers 2020-181, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    11. Ohlsbom, Roope & Maliranta, Mika, 2019. "Management Practises in Finnish Manufacturing Establishments: Evidence from FMOP," ETLA Working Papers 69, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.

    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:cen:wpaper:16-53. 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: Dawn Anderson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesgvus.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.