Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorLiu, Mingnande
dc.contributor.authorCho, Sarahde
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-26T15:35:57Z
dc.date.available2016-10-26T15:35:57Z
dc.date.issued2016de
dc.identifier.issn2296-4754
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/48609
dc.description.abstractWhen asking attitudinal questions with dichotomous and mutually exclusive response options, the questions can be presented in one of three ways: a full balanced question, a minimally balanced question, and an unbalanced question. Although previous research has compared the fully vs. minimally balanced rating scales, as far as we know, these three types of rating scales have not been tested in a strict experimental setting. In this study, we report two web survey experiments testing these three types of rating scales among 16 different questions. Different from most previous studies, this study used visual display only without any auditory component. Overall, the univariate distributions across these three scale balancing types are very similar to one another. Similar patterns are found when breaking down the analysis by respondent’s education level.en
dc.languageende
dc.subject.ddcSozialwissenschaften, Soziologiede
dc.subject.ddcSocial sciences, sociology, anthropologyen
dc.titleWeb survey experiments on fully balanced, minimally balanced and unbalanced rating scalesde
dc.description.reviewbegutachtet (peer reviewed)de
dc.description.reviewpeer revieweden
dc.source.journalSurvey Methods: Insights from the Field
dc.publisher.countryDEU
dc.subject.classozErhebungstechniken und Analysetechniken der Sozialwissenschaftende
dc.subject.classozMethods and Techniques of Data Collection and Data Analysis, Statistical Methods, Computer Methodsen
dc.subject.thesozAntwortverhaltende
dc.subject.thesozrating scaleen
dc.subject.thesozExperimentde
dc.subject.thesozonline surveyen
dc.subject.thesozOnline-Befragungde
dc.subject.thesozquestionnaireen
dc.subject.thesozEntwicklungde
dc.subject.thesozdevelopmenten
dc.subject.thesozresponse behavioren
dc.subject.thesozsurvey researchen
dc.subject.thesozexperimenten
dc.subject.thesozUmfrageforschungde
dc.subject.thesozRatingskalade
dc.subject.thesozFragebogende
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Namensnennung, Nicht kommerz., Keine Bearbeitungde
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Worksen
internal.statusnoch nicht fertig erschlossende
internal.identifier.thesoz10040714
internal.identifier.thesoz10055936
internal.identifier.thesoz10035808
internal.identifier.thesoz10043015
internal.identifier.thesoz10037911
internal.identifier.thesoz10037914
internal.identifier.thesoz10036415
dc.type.stockarticlede
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.source.pageinfo10de
internal.identifier.classoz10105
internal.identifier.journal472
internal.identifier.document32
internal.identifier.ddc300
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.13094/SMIF-2016-00002de
dc.description.pubstatusPublished Versionen
dc.description.pubstatusVeröffentlichungsversionde
internal.identifier.licence2
internal.identifier.pubstatus1
internal.identifier.review1
internal.pdf.version1.3
internal.pdf.validtrue
internal.pdf.wellformedtrue
internal.check.abstractlanguageharmonizerCERTAIN
internal.check.languageharmonizerCERTAIN_RETAINED


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record