研究 "中间即典型 "启发式与回答行为之间的联系

Ádám Stefkovics, Jan Karem Höhne
{"title":"研究 \"中间即典型 \"启发式与回答行为之间的联系","authors":"Ádám Stefkovics, Jan Karem Höhne","doi":"10.29115/sp-2024-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Question interpretation in web surveys may not only depend on the textual content but also on visual design aspects. Research has shown that respondents seem to make use of interpretative heuristics when answering questions potentially influencing their answer behavior. In this study, we investigate the implications of the ‘middle means typical’ (MMT) heuristic, which suggests that respondents perceive the middle option of a scale as the most typical one. For this purpose, we use data from a survey experiment embedded in the probability-based German Internet Panel (N = 4,679) varying the inclusion of a non-substantive “Don’t know” option (with or without separation from the substantive options) and scale polarity (unipolar or bipolar). The four questions under investigation were adopted from the Big5 inventory dealing with agreeableness and openness. The results suggest that the MMT heuristic has a minor impact on answer behavior, as the separation of non-substantive options did not affect answer distributions and response times (as a measure of response effort). However, scale polarity influenced answer behavior and response times. Similar to what has been observed in previous studies, unipolar scales elicited more middle answers and bipolar scales elicited more positive answers. Bipolar scales also resulted in longer response times. Although design violations against the MMT heuristic do not seem to impact answer behavior, we still recommend exercising caution when designing scales with non-substantive options. We also highlight the necessity of testing scales differing with respect to polarity.","PeriodicalId":74893,"journal":{"name":"Survey practice","volume":"172 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining the Link between the ‘Middle Means Typical’ Heuristic and Answer Behavior\",\"authors\":\"Ádám Stefkovics, Jan Karem Höhne\",\"doi\":\"10.29115/sp-2024-0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Question interpretation in web surveys may not only depend on the textual content but also on visual design aspects. Research has shown that respondents seem to make use of interpretative heuristics when answering questions potentially influencing their answer behavior. In this study, we investigate the implications of the ‘middle means typical’ (MMT) heuristic, which suggests that respondents perceive the middle option of a scale as the most typical one. For this purpose, we use data from a survey experiment embedded in the probability-based German Internet Panel (N = 4,679) varying the inclusion of a non-substantive “Don’t know” option (with or without separation from the substantive options) and scale polarity (unipolar or bipolar). The four questions under investigation were adopted from the Big5 inventory dealing with agreeableness and openness. The results suggest that the MMT heuristic has a minor impact on answer behavior, as the separation of non-substantive options did not affect answer distributions and response times (as a measure of response effort). However, scale polarity influenced answer behavior and response times. Similar to what has been observed in previous studies, unipolar scales elicited more middle answers and bipolar scales elicited more positive answers. Bipolar scales also resulted in longer response times. Although design violations against the MMT heuristic do not seem to impact answer behavior, we still recommend exercising caution when designing scales with non-substantive options. We also highlight the necessity of testing scales differing with respect to polarity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74893,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Survey practice\",\"volume\":\"172 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Survey practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29115/sp-2024-0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Survey practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29115/sp-2024-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

网络调查中的问题解释可能不仅取决于文字内容,还取决于视觉设计方面。研究表明,受访者在回答问题时似乎会使用解释性启发式,这可能会影响他们的回答行为。在本研究中,我们研究了 "中间意味着典型"(MMT)启发式的含义,该启发式认为受访者认为量表的中间选项是最典型的选项。为此,我们使用了基于概率的德国互联网面板(N = 4,679)中的调查实验数据,这些数据会改变非实质性的 "不知道 "选项(与实质性选项分离或不分离)和量表极性(单极性或双极性)。调查中的四个问题采用了 Big5 问卷中有关合意性和开放性的问题。结果表明,MMT 启发式对回答行为的影响较小,因为非实质性选项的分离并不影响答案分布和回答时间(作为衡量回答努力程度的指标)。然而,量表极性影响了回答行为和回答时间。与以往研究中观察到的情况类似,单极性量表会引出更多中间答案,而双极性量表则会引出更多正面答案。双极性量表也会导致更长的回答时间。虽然违反 MMT 启发式的设计似乎不会影响回答行为,但我们仍然建议在设计带有非实质性选项的量表时要谨慎。我们还强调了测试不同极性量表的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Examining the Link between the ‘Middle Means Typical’ Heuristic and Answer Behavior
Question interpretation in web surveys may not only depend on the textual content but also on visual design aspects. Research has shown that respondents seem to make use of interpretative heuristics when answering questions potentially influencing their answer behavior. In this study, we investigate the implications of the ‘middle means typical’ (MMT) heuristic, which suggests that respondents perceive the middle option of a scale as the most typical one. For this purpose, we use data from a survey experiment embedded in the probability-based German Internet Panel (N = 4,679) varying the inclusion of a non-substantive “Don’t know” option (with or without separation from the substantive options) and scale polarity (unipolar or bipolar). The four questions under investigation were adopted from the Big5 inventory dealing with agreeableness and openness. The results suggest that the MMT heuristic has a minor impact on answer behavior, as the separation of non-substantive options did not affect answer distributions and response times (as a measure of response effort). However, scale polarity influenced answer behavior and response times. Similar to what has been observed in previous studies, unipolar scales elicited more middle answers and bipolar scales elicited more positive answers. Bipolar scales also resulted in longer response times. Although design violations against the MMT heuristic do not seem to impact answer behavior, we still recommend exercising caution when designing scales with non-substantive options. We also highlight the necessity of testing scales differing with respect to polarity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信