Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorJohann, David
dc.contributor.authorThomas, Kathrin
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-07T10:49:44Z
dc.date.available2017-06-07T10:49:44Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.issn2296-4754
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/52040
dc.description.abstractThis paper investigates the concurrent validity of the Crosswise Model when “high incidence behaviour” is concerned by looking at respondents’ self-reported attitudes towards Muslims. We analyse the concurrent validity by comparing the performance of the Crosswise Model to a Direct Question format. The Crosswise Model was designed to ensure anonymity and confidentiality in order to reduce Social Desirability Bias induced by the tendency of survey respondents to present themselves in a favourable light. The article suggests that measures obtained using either question format are fairly similar. However, when estimating models and comparing the impact of common predictors of negative attitudes towards Muslims, some puzzling results are revealed raising concerns about the validity of the Crosswise Model.en
dc.languageen
dc.subject.ddcSozialwissenschaften, Soziologiede
dc.subject.ddcSocial sciences, sociology, anthropologyen
dc.subject.otherCrosswise-Modell
dc.titleTesting the Validity of the Crosswise Model: A Study on Attitudes Towards Muslims
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.thesozValiditätde
dc.subject.thesozModellanalysede
dc.subject.thesozsampleen
dc.subject.thesozAustriaen
dc.subject.thesozÖsterreichde
dc.subject.thesozmeasurementen
dc.subject.thesozsocial desirabilityen
dc.subject.thesozModellvergleichde
dc.subject.thesozStichprobede
dc.subject.thesozmodel comparisonen
dc.subject.thesozMuslimde
dc.subject.thesozMessungde
dc.subject.thesozAnonymitätde
dc.subject.thesozAntwortverhaltende
dc.subject.thesozattitudeen
dc.subject.thesozsurveyen
dc.subject.thesozanonymityen
dc.subject.thesozBefragungde
dc.subject.thesozsoziale Erwünschtheitde
dc.subject.thesozMuslimen
dc.subject.thesozvalidityen
dc.subject.thesozresponse behavioren
dc.subject.thesozmodel analysisen
dc.subject.thesozsurvey researchen
dc.subject.thesozUmfrageforschungde
dc.subject.thesozEinstellungde
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Namensnennungde
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Attributionen
ssoar.contributor.institutionGESIS
internal.statusnoch nicht fertig erschlossen
internal.identifier.thesoz10058111
internal.identifier.thesoz10035808
internal.identifier.thesoz10035712
internal.identifier.thesoz10048095
internal.identifier.thesoz10040166
internal.identifier.thesoz10036930
internal.identifier.thesoz10036125
internal.identifier.thesoz10040714
internal.identifier.thesoz10035485
internal.identifier.thesoz10037472
internal.identifier.thesoz10037910
internal.identifier.thesoz10052601
internal.identifier.thesoz10049626
dc.type.stockarticle
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.source.pageinfo6
internal.identifier.classoz10105
internal.identifier.journal472
internal.identifier.document32
internal.identifier.ddc300
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.13094/SMIF-2017-00001
dc.description.pubstatusPublished Versionen
dc.description.pubstatusVeröffentlichungsversionde
internal.identifier.licence1
internal.identifier.pubstatus1
internal.identifier.review1
internal.pdf.version1.4
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