不同的设备在不同的评分点和响应格式下表现一样好吗?测量不变性和可靠性的检验

IF 6.5 2区社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS

Sociological Methods & Research Pub Date : 2022-02-07 DOI:10.1177/00491241221077237

Natalja Menold, V. Toepoel

{"title":"不同的设备在不同的评分点和响应格式下表现一样好吗?测量不变性和可靠性的检验","authors":"Natalja Menold, V. Toepoel","doi":"10.1177/00491241221077237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research on mixed devices in web surveys is in its infancy. Using a randomized experiment, we investigated device effects (desktop PC, tablet and mobile phone) for six response formats and four different numbers of scale points. N = 5,077 members of an online access panel participated in the experiment. An exact test of measurement invariance and Composite Reliability were investigated. The results provided full data comparability for devices and formats, with the exception of continuous Visual Analog Scale (VAS), but limited comparability for different numbers of scale points. There were device effects on reliability when looking at the interactions with formats and number of scale points. VAS, use of mobile phones and five point scales consistently gained lower reliability. We suggest technically less demanding implementations as well as a unified design for mixed-device surveys.","PeriodicalId":21849,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Methods & Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do Different Devices Perform Equally Well with Different Numbers of Scale Points and Response Formats? A test of measurement invariance and reliability\",\"authors\":\"Natalja Menold, V. Toepoel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00491241221077237\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research on mixed devices in web surveys is in its infancy. Using a randomized experiment, we investigated device effects (desktop PC, tablet and mobile phone) for six response formats and four different numbers of scale points. N = 5,077 members of an online access panel participated in the experiment. An exact test of measurement invariance and Composite Reliability were investigated. The results provided full data comparability for devices and formats, with the exception of continuous Visual Analog Scale (VAS), but limited comparability for different numbers of scale points. There were device effects on reliability when looking at the interactions with formats and number of scale points. VAS, use of mobile phones and five point scales consistently gained lower reliability. We suggest technically less demanding implementations as well as a unified design for mixed-device surveys.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21849,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Methods & Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Methods & Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00491241221077237\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Methods & Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00491241221077237","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICAL METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

摘要

对网络调查中混合设备的研究尚处于起步阶段。使用随机实验，我们研究了六种响应格式和四个不同数量的量表点的设备效应（台式电脑、平板电脑和手机）。N = 5077名在线访问小组成员参与了这项实验。研究了测量不变性和复合可靠性的精确检验。除连续视觉模拟量表（VAS）外，结果为设备和格式提供了完整的数据可比性，但不同数量的量表点的可比性有限。当观察与标度点的格式和数量的交互时，设备会对可靠性产生影响。VAS、使用手机和五点量表的可靠性一直较低。我们建议在技术上要求较低的实现方式，以及针对混合设备调查的统一设计。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Do Different Devices Perform Equally Well with Different Numbers of Scale Points and Response Formats? A test of measurement invariance and reliability

Research on mixed devices in web surveys is in its infancy. Using a randomized experiment, we investigated device effects (desktop PC, tablet and mobile phone) for six response formats and four different numbers of scale points. N = 5,077 members of an online access panel participated in the experiment. An exact test of measurement invariance and Composite Reliability were investigated. The results provided full data comparability for devices and formats, with the exception of continuous Visual Analog Scale (VAS), but limited comparability for different numbers of scale points. There were device effects on reliability when looking at the interactions with formats and number of scale points. VAS, use of mobile phones and five point scales consistently gained lower reliability. We suggest technically less demanding implementations as well as a unified design for mixed-device surveys.

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

Sociological Methods & Research Multiple-

CiteScore

16.30

自引率

3.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Sociological Methods & Research is a quarterly journal devoted to sociology as a cumulative empirical science. The objectives of SMR are multiple, but emphasis is placed on articles that advance the understanding of the field through systematic presentations that clarify methodological problems and assist in ordering the known facts in an area. Review articles will be published, particularly those that emphasize a critical analysis of the status of the arts, but original presentations that are broadly based and provide new research will also be published. Intrinsically, SMR is viewed as substantive journal but one that is highly focused on the assessment of the scientific status of sociology. The scope is broad and flexible, and authors are invited to correspond with the editors about the appropriateness of their articles.