1. SURVEY RESEARCH

2. Survey Research  a.k.a. “paper-pencil” measures or “self-report” measures  represents the dominant paradigm for social science research in the last 30 years  advantages: expedience in gathering data yields interval level data

3. Do subjects know their own minds?  problems: problem of “mindfulness,” verbal reports of mental processes are suspect problem of “non-attitudes,” people tend to venture an opinion whether they have one or not unreliability of self-reports data: even factual information can be misreported

4. Will subjects tell you if they know?  intentional misreporting of information.  social desirability bias  reasons for non-disclosure  embarrassment  fear of negative sanctions  shame, public humiliation  privacy  sometimes helpful to include a “lie scale”

5. Questionnaire Design and Construction  phrasing of questions is critical  avoid vague, nebulous questions Bad example: “What do you think about abortion?” Bad example: “How many children do you have?”  questions must be clear, unambiguous Good example: “Which of the following statements best represents your attitude toward elective abortions in the first trimester?” Conduct a “readability analysis”  avoid lengthy questions; keep questions short, succinct Bad example: Sara Palin would be the first female Vice President Secretary of the United States. Do you think her gender wuold be a problem in negotiating with the Arab world, which is a male- dominated culture? Good example: Would Hillary Clinton make a good Supreme Court justice?

6. questionnaire design and construction-- continued  avoid double-barreled questions (compound questions) Bad example: “Do you favor stricter hand gun controls and mandatory minimum sentences for carjackers?”  avoid loaded language (push polling) Bad example: “Don’t you think that...?” “Isn’t it true that...?” Bad example: Emotionally charged words: “ gang member,” “welfare mother,” “extremist groups,” “spin doctor,” etc.  avoid slang, jargon, abbreviations and acronyms Bad example: “Should states regulate PETA and the ALF?” Bad example: “Do you think hip hop is wack?”  avoid or minimize negative wording Bad example: Is the Bush administration right in not establishing a firm deadline for withdrawing from Iraq?

7. open-ended versus close-ended questions  Schuman, Ludwig, & Krosnick (1986): 60% of respondents selected one of four options in a close-ended format, but only 2.4% mentioned any of the same four responses in an open-ended format.  open-ended: allows subjects more leeway, flexibility  “What is your primary ethnic/cultural background?”  requires a content analysis of responses  close-ended or “forced-choice” ties respondents’ hands somewhat  easy to code the data  always include an “other_____________” category

8. phrasing of questions is critical  even slight variations in wording can alter respondents’ answers. “occupied territory” versus “contested territory” “assisted suicide” versus “mercy killing” “fetus” versus “unborn child”  make questions concrete, come down the “ladder of abstraction”  Use negatively worded questions or statements sparingly sometimes necessary to include reverse-valenced items to identify a “response set”

9. …more on phrasing questions  Avoid evaluative language Phrasing of questions should not imply approval, disapproval Follow-ups should not suggest surprise, liking, disliking, etc.  Bad example: Do you think the Democratic dominated Congress should lift the harsh restrictions on stem cell research?  Bad example: Despite its poor track record in crisis intervention, do you think the United Nations should intervene in Darfur, Sudan?

10. respondents’ abilities  Respondents must be capable and willing to answer the questions May be unaware of topic/issue May be unwilling to disclose May lie, exaggerate, under-report or over-report example: If you ask people what nonverbal cues they leak when they lie, people may not know. example: if you ask people what they would do in a hostage crisis, how would they know?

11. additional considerations  order effects: sequencing of questions can be a factor “halo effect”: carry-over from one item to the next use multiple versions of questionnaire “response set”: checking the same response all the way down a questionnaire use “reverse scaling” to detect this

12. additional considerations  gender of researcher/respondent can influence responses  ethnicity of researcher/respondent can influence responses  medium can influence responses face-to-face interview, telephone survey, mail survey anonymous versus non-anonymous questionnaire  fatigue: minimize length of surveys

13. Characteristics of types of surveys Type of surveyObtaining sample Cooperation rate Cost per respondent advantagesdisadvantages in persondifficultmediumhighinterviewer rapport, nonverbal cues respondent apprehension, expensive telephoneeasyhighmediumFastLimited time, nonrandom sample mall intercepteasymedium fast, in-personNonrandom sample maileasylow expensiveNonrandom sample, respondent errors computer- assisted easyhighlowautomatic data entry Requires computer literacy