IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/diw/diwsop/diw_sp629.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Method Effects in Factorial Surveys: An Analysis of Respondents' Comments, Interviewers' Assessments, and Response Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Carsten Sauer
  • Katrin Auspurg
  • Thomas Hinz
  • Stefan Liebig
  • Jürgen Schupp

Abstract

This paper describes the implementation of a factorial survey within the SOEP-Pretest of 2008 and investigates (1) respondents' comments about the vignettes, (2) interviewers' assessments of respondents comprehension and willingness to answer, and (3) response behavior regarding response time, use of the answering scale, and consistency of evaluations by different age groups and educational background. The respondents evaluated 24 vignettes consisting of ten dimensions that described full-time employees and their gross earnings. The evaluation task was to assess whether the given earnings were just or unjust, and if they were rated as unjust, respondents had to specify the amount of injustice on an 100-point rating scale. In regard to respondents' comments, the critique mentioned most frequently by respondents referred to the content (unrealistic descriptions) and the number of the vignettes. The analysis of the interviewers' assessments of respondents' comprehension and willingness to answer revealed less comprehension and willingness to answer for older and less well educated respondents, although these differences were similar to those found for the complete questionnaire. The analysis of the response behavior revealed no di erences of response time between the groups. Analyses of response consistency show that one should consider hints for simplifying heuristics: such heuristics can lead to an artificially high response consistency. The implications of the findings are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Carsten Sauer & Katrin Auspurg & Thomas Hinz & Stefan Liebig & Jürgen Schupp, 2014. "Method Effects in Factorial Surveys: An Analysis of Respondents' Comments, Interviewers' Assessments, and Response Behavior," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 629, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwsop:diw_sp629
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.438559.de/diw_sp0629.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arie Kapteyn & James P. Smith & Arthur Van Soest, 2013. "Are A mericans Really Less Happy with Their Incomes?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 59(1), pages 44-65, March.
    2. Stefan Liebig & Jürgen Schupp, 2008. "Immer mehr Erwerbstätige empfinden ihr Einkommen als ungerecht," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 75(31), pages 434-440.
    3. Stefan Liebig & Jürgen Schupp, 2005. "Empfinden die Erwerbstätigen in Deutschland ihre Einkommen als gerecht?," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 72(48), pages 721-725.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:diw:diwsop:diw_sp629. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bibliothek). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/sodiwde.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.