Suchergebnisse

Introduction / Uwe Engel -- Motivated misreporting : shaping answers to reduce survey burden / Roger Tourangeau, Frauke Kreuter, and Stephanie Eckman -- Audio-recording of open-ended survey questions : a solution to the problems of interviewer transcription? / Patrick Sturgis and Rebekah Luff -- Framing effects / Uwe Engel and Britta Köster -- Estimating and comparing the quality of different scales of an online survey using an MTMM approach / Melanie Revilla and Willem E. Saris -- Collecting MTMM data on satisfaction with life / Laura Burmeister and Uwe Engel -- On the quality of web panels / Jelke Bethlehem -- Online surveys and the burden of mobile responding / Marika de Bruijne and Marije Oudejans -- Well-being, survey attitudes, and readiness to report on everyday life events in an experience sampling study / Laura Burmeister, Uwe Engel, and Björn Oliver Schmidt -- Nonresponse, measurement error, and estimates of change : lessons from the German PPSM panel / Suat Can and Uwe Engel -- Handling of missing data in statistical analyses / Daniel Salfrán and Martin Spiess -- Multiple imputation of overdispersed multilevel count data / Kristian Kleinke and Jost Reinecke

Introduction / Uwe Engel -- Motivated misreporting : shaping answers to reduce survey burden / Roger Tourangeau, Frauke Kreuter, and Stephanie Eckman -- Audio-recording of open-ended survey questions : a solution to the problems of interviewer transcription? / Patrick Sturgis and Rebekah Luff -- Framing effects / Uwe Engel and Britta Köster -- Estimating and comparing the quality of different scales of an online survey using an MTMM approach / Melanie Revilla and Willem E. Saris -- Collecting MTMM data on satisfaction with life / Laura Burmeister and Uwe Engel -- On the quality of web panels / Jelke Bethlehem -- Online surveys and the burden of mobile responding / Marika de Bruijne and Marije Oudejans -- Well-being, survey attitudes, and readiness to report on everyday life events in an experience sampling study / Laura Burmeister, Uwe Engel, and Björn Oliver Schmidt -- Nonresponse, measurement error, and estimates of change : lessons from the German PPSM panel / Suat Can and Uwe Engel -- Handling of missing data in statistical analyses / Daniel Salfrán and Martin Spiess -- Multiple imputation of overdispersed multilevel count data / Kristian Kleinke and Jost Reinecke

High-quality data from large-scale surveys provide a solid basis for outstanding research in the social sciences. Because of the unique demands of survey measurement in terms of the resources and skills required, it should be viewed as a specific sector of the research data infrastructure. In Germany, large-scale surveys have been established both within and outside academia, and major new projects are underway. Clearly, the sector is expanding. There is a need to discuss future challenges, not only with a focus on individual large projects, but with a view to the sector of large-scale survey measurement in general. One aspect is the segmentation of large-scale survey measurement in Germany along institutional lines (statistical offices, ministerial or government agency research (Ressortforschung), public research institutions, and the academic community). Here, we recommend that an overall framework be developed covering all sub-sectors. A second aspect is the infrastructure required for largescale, high-quality data collection. In Germany (outside the sector of Statistical Offices), this infrastructure is provided by private survey organisations. We argue that these should be recognised as relevant actors within the research data infrastructure. They have to invest in technological and human resources in order to provide the professional services required, and they need conditions and forms of cooperation that encourage this investment.

"High-quality data from large-scale surveys provide a solid basis for outstanding research in the social sciences. Because of the unique demands of survey measurement in terms of the resources and skills required, it should be viewed as a specific sector of the research data infrastructure. In Germany, large-scale surveys have been established both within and outside academia, and major new projects are underway. Clearly, the sector is expanding. There is a need to discuss future challenges, not only with a focus on individual large projects, but with a view to the sector of large-scale survey measurement in general. One aspect is the segmentation of large-scale survey measurement in Germany along institutional lines (statistical offices, ministerial or government agency research (Ressortforschung), public research institutions, and the academic community). Here, we recommend that an overall framework be developed covering all sub-sectors. A second aspect is the infrastructure required for largescale, high-quality data collection. In Germany (outside the sector of Statistical Offices), this infrastructure is provided by private survey organisations. We argue that these should be recognised as relevant actors within the research data infrastructure. They have to invest in technological and human resources in order to provide the professional services required, and they need conditions and forms of cooperation that encourage this investment." [author's abstract]

Measurement of an economic good by opinion survey constitutes a variant of the political opinion polls widely familiar from news reporting. The paper relates the minimum sample size needed for the survey measurement of a wealth-dependent parameter to the smallest sample for a political poll giving the same precision. Measuring a strongly wealth-dependent parameter by survey requires a sample size of ~2000 or more to provide precision equivalent to the 3% margin of error customary in UK political opinion polls. It is shown that the survey measurement of the "value of a prevented fatality" (VPF) used in the UK as a health and safety spending yardstick requires ~3000 people to be questioned. The analysis shows the actual sample size used, 167, to be inadequate. This adds to the problems besetting the UK VPF, as the method the surveyors used to interpret their data has already been shown invalid.

Abstract
Researchers have long known that the terms used in questions posed to respondents shape the answers they give. Processes underlying these differences have generally been attributed to respondents' interpretations of the questions (i.e., what do the terms lead them to focus on) and examined as a framing effect. Yet evidence that people often answer questions they do not fully understand means it is also possible that some of this difference may stem from respondents' ability to parse what the questions are asking about (i.e., do they comprehend the question). In three online survey experiments, we manipulate wordings for policy attitude questions about the DREAM Act, Trump's trade disputes, and the Affordable Care Act to assess how both question comprehension and interpretation depend on the wordings selected. We find that reported attitudes vary as a joint function of both processes. By comparing response patterns and simulating individuals' "informed responses" across wordings, we can disentangle differences due to incomplete understandings (and misunderstandings) from those attributable to partisan interpretations. Evidence that individuals with greater topical knowledge better recognize the similarity of different wordings confirms that some of the wording effect is associated not just with framing, but also with comprehension.

The present dissertation explores language effects in a comparative survey i.e. to what extent linguistic diversity affects equivalence in a comparative survey. This is done by studying three different dimensions on the challenges of designing a comparative multilingual survey: survey translation, linguistically diverse countries and bilingualism. Guidelines in survey translation do not link assessment criteria and measurement equivalence testing. I propose a systematic procedure to compare versions of a question in different languages before fieldwork which establishes that link. In linguistically diverse countries, survey instruments are translated into more than one language, equivalence is commonly assumed, not tested. I test for invariance distinguishing the response and cognitive processes to a survey question. Finally, I study measurement equivalence within an individual in two languages for political constructs (bilingualism), challenging current methodological approaches by bringing latent variable models. In each dimension, findings aim to contribute to improving comparative survey methodology. ; Esta tesis explora los efectos del lenguaje en una encuesta comparativa: en qué medida la diversidad lingüística afecta la equivalencia de los datos mediante el estudio de tres dimensiones: la traducción de encuestas, países lingüísticamente diversos y el bilingüismo. Las directrices actuales en la traducción de encuestas no vinculan los criterios de evaluación con un test de equivalencia. Se propone un procedimiento sistemático para comparar las versiones de una pregunta que establece dicho vínculo, en diferentes idiomas antes del trabajo de campo. En países lingüísticamente diversos, el cuestionario se traduce en más de un idioma. Se realiza un test de equivalencia que permite distinguir los procesos de respuesta de los cognitivos. Finalmente, se estudia la equivalencia de conceptos políticos en dos idiomas para un individuo (bilingüismo), proponiendo un enfoque metodológico de modelos de variables latentes. ...

Despite an upsurge of red tape research, a central issue remains unresolved. The most widely used red tape measures draw on key informant reports about red tape. The starkest objection to such measures is that key informant reports are mere perceptions—perceptions that are subject to distortion. We assess the validity of key informant perception-based measures of personnel red tape by using "anchoring vignettes." Findings suggest that anchoring vignettes can be used to improve the accuracy of survey measures of red tape. Implications of findings for red tape scholarship and survey measurement in public management are discussed.

This case study is based on the research project I undertook for my PhD dissertation. The goal of the project was to quantitatively analyze the effects of socially constructed identities on the political attitudes and behavior of sexual minorities in the United States. Achieving this goal necessitated the collection of individual-level data about the identity and political experiences of sexual minorities. This case study focuses on the construction of an online survey instrument and its administration to a representative sample of more than 1,200 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the United States. The incorporation of intersectional theory into the research design allowed me to robustly measure heterogeneity within a group often considered politically and behaviorally homogeneous. My experience highlights the difficulties of LGBT survey research, the complexity of quantitative intersectional analysis, and the imperative of survey researchers to justify the use of categorical indicators in survey instruments to prevent the continued marginalization of intersectional identities in survey research.