The quality of data in surveys is affected by response burden and questionnaire length. With an increasing number of questions, respondents can become bored, tired, and annoyed and may take shortcuts to reduce the effort needed to complete the survey. In this article, direct evidence is presented on how the position of items within a web questionnaire influences respondents' focus of attention. In two experiments, part of an eye-tracking study and an online survey, respectively, a variety of indicators show that data quality is lower if the experimental question is positioned at the end rather than at the beginning of a questionnaire. Practical implications are discussed.
To collect high-quality data, survey designers aim to develop questions that each respondent can understand as intended. A critical step to this end is designing questions that minimize the respondents' burden by reducing the cognitive effort required to comprehend and answer them. One promising technique for identifying problematic survey questions is eye tracking. This article investigates the potential of eye movements and pupil dilations as indicators for evaluating survey questions. Respondents were randomly assigned to either a problematic or an improved version of six experimental questions. By analyzing fixation times, fixation counts, and pupil diameters, it was examined whether these parameters could be used to distinguish between the two versions. Identifying the improved version worked best by comparing fixation times, whereas in most cases, it was not possible to differentiate between versions on the basis of pupil data. Limitations and practical implications of the findings are discussed.
Abstract Existing research shows that response options are endorsed at a higher rate when presented in forced-choice format (FC, yes-no grids) than in check-all-that-apply format (CATA). Information Processing Theory explains this contrast with differential effects on the level of cognitive reflection. The study tests this hypothesis with eye movement data collected in a randomized laboratory experiment in which 131 respondents participated in a web survey with four treatment questions. In one condition (CATA) the questions were presented in check-all format, in the other (FC) in forced-choice structure. I find higher levels of affirmative responses and longer completion times in FC compared to CATA in three of the questions. With all four questions, respondents invested more cognitive effort—measured by fixation counts and times—in FC than in CATA when considering the question in total. I find no differences when considering only the list of response options, however. This indicates that the longer fixation times did not result from a more careful evaluation of the response options. Other possible causes and practical implications are discussed.
Cognitive online pretests have, in recent years, become recognized as a promising tool for evaluating questions prior to their use in actual surveys. While existing research has shown that cognitive online pretests produce similar results to face-to-face cognitive interviews with regard to the problems detected and the item revisions suggested, little is known about the ideal design of a cognitive online pretest. This study examines whether the number of open-ended probing questions asked during a cognitive online pretest has an effect on the quality and depth of respondents' answers as well as on respondents' satisfaction with the survey. We conducted an experiment in which we varied the number of open-ended probing questions that respondents received during a cognitive online pretest. The questionnaire consisted of 26 survey questions, and respondents received either 13 probing questions (n = 120, short version) or 21 probing questions (n = 120, long version). The findings suggest that asking a greater number of open-ended probes in a cognitive online pretest does not undermine the quality of respondents' answers represented by the response quality indicators: (1) amount of probe nonresponse, (2) number of uninterpretable answers, (3) number of dropouts, (4) number of words, (5) response times, and (6) number and type of themes covered by the probes. Furthermore, the respondents' satisfaction with the survey is not affected by the number of probes being asked.
In this study, we investigated whether incorporating eye tracking into cognitive interviewing is effective when pretesting survey questions. In the control condition, a cognitive interview was conducted using a standardized interview protocol that included pre-defined probing questions for about one-quarter of the questions in a 52-item questionnaire. In the experimental condition, participants' eye movements were tracked while they completed an online version of the questionnaire. Simultaneously, their reading patterns were monitored for evidence of response problems. Afterward, a cognitive interview was conducted using an interview protocol identical to that in the control condition. We compared both approaches with regard to the number and types of problems they detected. We found support for our hypothesis that cognitive interviewing and eye tracking complement each other effectively. As expected, the hybrid method was more productive in identifying both questionnaire problems and problematic questions than applying cognitive interviewing alone.
In questionnaire pretesting, supplementing cognitive interviewing with eye tracking is a promising new method that provides additional insights into respondents' cognitive processes while answering survey questions. When incorporating eye tracking into cognitive interviewing, two retrospective probing techniques seem to be particularly useful. In the first technique - retrospective probing - participants complete an online questionnaire, while cognitive interviewers monitor participants' eye movements in an adjacent room and note down any peculiarities in their reading patterns. Afterward, the interviewers ask targeted probing questions about these peculiarities in a subsequent cognitive interview. In the second technique - gaze video cued retrospective probing - respondents are additionally shown a video of their eye movements during the cognitive interview. This video stimulus is supposed to serve as a visual cue that may better enable respondents to remember their thoughts while answering the questions. We examine whether one of the two techniques is more effective when it comes to identifying problematic survey questions. In a lab experiment, participants' eye movements (n = 42) were tracked while they completed six questions of an online questionnaire. Simultaneously, their reading patterns were monitored by an interviewer for evidence of response problems. After completion of the online survey, a cognitive interview was conducted. In the retrospective probing condition, probing questions were asked if peculiar reading patterns were observed during the eye-tracking session (e.g., rereadings of specific words or text passages). In the other condition, participants were shown a video of their recorded eye movements, in addition to receiving probing questions about the questions displayed. Results show that both techniques did not differ in terms of the total number of problems identified. However, gaze video cued retrospective probing identified fewer unique problems and fewer types of problems than pure retrospective probing.
Grid questions are frequently employed in web surveys due to their assumed response efficiency. In line with this, many previous studies have found shorter response times for grid questions compared to item-by-item formats. Our contribution to this literature is to investigate how altering the question format affects response behavior and the depth of cognitive processing when answering both grid question and item-by-item formats. To answer these questions, we implemented an experiment with three questions in an eye-tracking study. Each question consisted of a set of ten items which respondents answered either on a single page (large grid), on two pages with five items each (small grid), or on ten separate pages (item-by-item). We did not find substantial differences in cognitive processing overall, while the processing of the question stem and the response scale labels was significantly higher for the item-by-item design than for the large grid in all three questions. We, however, found that when answering an item in a grid question, respondents often refer to surrounding items when making a judgement. We discuss the findings and limitations of our study and provide suggestions for practical design decisions.
Pretesting survey questions via cognitive interviewing is based on the assumptions that the problems identified by the method truly exist in a later survey and that question revisions based on cognitive interviewing findings produce higher-quality data than the original questions. In this study, we empirically tested these assumptions in a web survey experiment (n = 2,200). Respondents received one of two versions of a question on self-reported financial knowledge: either the original draft version, which was pretested in ten cognitive interviews, or a revised version, which was modified based on the results of the cognitive interviews. We examined whether the cognitive interviewing findings predicted problems encountered in the web survey and whether the revised question version was associated with higher content-related and criterion-related validity than the draft version. The results show that cognitive interviewing is effective in identifying real question problems, but not necessarily in fixing survey questions and improving data quality. Overall, our findings point to the importance of using iterative pretesting designs, that is, carrying out multiple rounds of cognitive interviews and also testing the revisions to ensure that they are indeed of higher quality than the draft questions.
Pretesting survey questions via cognitive interviewing is based on the assumptions that the problems identified by the method truly exist in a later survey and that question revisions based on cognitive interviewing findings produce higher-quality data than the original questions. In this study, we empirically tested these assumptions in a web survey experiment (n = 2,200). Respondents received one of two versions of a question on self-reported financial knowledge: either the original draft version, which was pretested in ten cognitive interviews, or a revised version, which was modified based on the results of the cognitive interviews. We examined whether the cognitive interviewing findings predicted problems encountered in the web survey and whether the revised question version was associated with higher content-related and criterion-related validity than the draft version. The results show that cognitive interviewing is effective in identifying real question problems, but not necessarily in fixing survey questions and improving data quality. Overall, our findings point to the importance of using iterative pretesting designs, that is, carrying out multiple rounds of cognitive interviews and also testing the revisions to ensure that they are indeed of higher quality than the draft questions.
A question asking for respondents' sex is one of the standard sociodemographic characteristics collected in a survey. Until now, it typically consisted of a simple question (e.g., "Are you…?") with two answer categories ("male" and "female"). In 2019, Germany implemented the additional sex designation divers for intersex people. In survey methodology, this has led to an ongoing discussion how to include a third category in questionnaires. We investigate respondents' understanding of the third category, and whether introducing it affects data quality. Moreover, we investigate the understanding of the German term Geschlecht for sex and gender. To answer our research questions, we implemented different question wordings asking for sex/gender in a non-probability-based online panel in Germany and combined them with open-ended questions. Findings and implications for surveys are discussed.
Web surveys are a common self-administered mode of data collection using written language to convey information. This language is usually accompanied by visual design elements, such as numbers, symbols, and graphics. As shown by previous research, such elements of survey questions can affect response behavior because respondents sometimes use interpretive heuristics, such as the "middle means typical" and the "left and top means first" heuristics when answering survey questions. In this study, we adopted the designs and survey questions of two experiments reported in Tourangeau, Couper, and Conrad (2004). One experiment varied the position of nonsubstantive response options in relation to other substantive response options and the second experiment varied the order of the response options. We implemented both experiments in an eye-tracking study. By recording respondents' eye movements, we are able to observe how they read question stems and response options and we are able to draw conclusions about the survey response process the questions initiate. This enables us to investigate the mechanisms underlying the two interpretive heuristics and to test the assumptions of Tourangeau et al. (2004) about the ways in which interpretive heuristics influence survey responding. The eye-tracking data reveal mixed results for the two interpretive heuristics. For the middle means typical heuristic, it remains somewhat unclear whether respondents seize on the conceptual or visual midpoint of a response scale when answering survey questions. For the left and top means first heuristic, we found that violations of the heuristic increase response effort in terms of eye fixations. These results are discussed in the context of the findings of the original studies.
Cognitive pretesting is generally considered to be indispensable for the successful development of new survey questions, and hence for the quality of the data obtained by the survey. Supplementing cognitive interviewing with the method of eye tracking offers the possibility to observe eye movements of respondents in real-time providing additional information about cognitive processes of respondents. Research suggests that combining both methods helps to identify additional problems with questions that would remain undetected if only one method was applied. This contribution provides an introduction to cognitive interviewing in combination with eye tracking. The following questions are addressed: What is the rationale behind combining cognitive interviewing and eye tracking? How should eye tracking be implemented into cognitive interviewing? How can eye-tracking data be used and analyzed in the context of cognitive pretesting?
