对认知访谈报告框架的反思:效能、期望和对未来的承诺。

IF 2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL
Gordon B. Willis, H. Boeije
{"title":"对认知访谈报告框架的反思:效能、期望和对未来的承诺。","authors":"Gordon B. Willis, H. Boeije","doi":"10.1027/1614-2241/A000074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Based on the experiences of three research groups using and evaluating the Cognitive Interviewing Reporting Framework (CIRF), we draw conclusions about the utility of the CIRF as a guide to creating cognitive testing reports. Authors generally found the CIRF checklist to be usable, and that it led to a more complete description of key steps involved. However, despite the explicit direction by the CIRF to include a full explanation of major steps and features (e.g., research objectives and research design), the three cognitive testing reports tended to simply state what was done, without further justification. Authors varied in their judgments concerning whether the CIRF requires the appropriate level of detail. Overall, we believe that current cognitive interviewing practice will benefit from including, within cognitive testing reports, the 10 categories of information specified by the CIRF. Future use of the CIRF may serve to direct the overall research project from the start, and to further the goal of ...","PeriodicalId":18476,"journal":{"name":"Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for The Behavioral and Social Sciences","volume":"9 1","pages":"123-128"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflections on the Cognitive Interviewing Reporting Framework: Efficacy, expectations, and promise for the future.\",\"authors\":\"Gordon B. Willis, H. Boeije\",\"doi\":\"10.1027/1614-2241/A000074\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Based on the experiences of three research groups using and evaluating the Cognitive Interviewing Reporting Framework (CIRF), we draw conclusions about the utility of the CIRF as a guide to creating cognitive testing reports. Authors generally found the CIRF checklist to be usable, and that it led to a more complete description of key steps involved. However, despite the explicit direction by the CIRF to include a full explanation of major steps and features (e.g., research objectives and research design), the three cognitive testing reports tended to simply state what was done, without further justification. Authors varied in their judgments concerning whether the CIRF requires the appropriate level of detail. Overall, we believe that current cognitive interviewing practice will benefit from including, within cognitive testing reports, the 10 categories of information specified by the CIRF. Future use of the CIRF may serve to direct the overall research project from the start, and to further the goal of ...\",\"PeriodicalId\":18476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for The Behavioral and Social Sciences\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"123-128\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for The Behavioral and Social Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/A000074\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for The Behavioral and Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/A000074","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

基于三个研究小组使用和评估认知访谈报告框架(CIRF)的经验,我们得出了CIRF作为创建认知测试报告指南的效用的结论。作者通常发现CIRF检查表是可用的,并且它导致了对所涉及的关键步骤的更完整的描述。然而,尽管CIRF明确指示包括主要步骤和特征的完整解释(例如,研究目标和研究设计),三份认知测试报告倾向于简单地陈述所做的事情,没有进一步的理由。作者对CIRF是否需要适当程度的细节有不同的判断。总的来说,我们认为当前的认知访谈实践将受益于在认知测试报告中包括CIRF指定的10类信息。未来使用CIRF可以从一开始就指导整个研究项目,并进一步实现…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reflections on the Cognitive Interviewing Reporting Framework: Efficacy, expectations, and promise for the future.
Based on the experiences of three research groups using and evaluating the Cognitive Interviewing Reporting Framework (CIRF), we draw conclusions about the utility of the CIRF as a guide to creating cognitive testing reports. Authors generally found the CIRF checklist to be usable, and that it led to a more complete description of key steps involved. However, despite the explicit direction by the CIRF to include a full explanation of major steps and features (e.g., research objectives and research design), the three cognitive testing reports tended to simply state what was done, without further justification. Authors varied in their judgments concerning whether the CIRF requires the appropriate level of detail. Overall, we believe that current cognitive interviewing practice will benefit from including, within cognitive testing reports, the 10 categories of information specified by the CIRF. Future use of the CIRF may serve to direct the overall research project from the start, and to further the goal of ...
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.50%
发文量
16
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信