TY - JOUR
T1 - Using Apples and Oranges to Judge Quality?
T2 - Selection of Appropriate Cross-National Indicators of Response Quality in Open-Ended Questions
AU - Meitinger, K.M.
N1 - Funding Information:
The data set generated and analyzed during the current study is available on request from the corresponding author. Email: [email protected] The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) as part of the project ?Optimizing Probing Procedures for Cross-National Web Surveys? [BR 908/5-1 to Michael Braun, Wolfgang Bandilla, and Lars Kaczmirek].
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2019.
PY - 2021/6/1
Y1 - 2021/6/1
N2 - Methodological studies usually gauge response quality in narrative open-ended questions with the proportion of nonresponse, response length, response time, and number of themes mentioned by respondents. However, not all of these indicators may be comparable and appropriate for evaluating open-ended questions in a cross-national context. This study assesses the cross-national appropriateness of these indicators and their potential bias. For the analysis, we use data from two web surveys conducted in May 2014 with 2,685 respondents and in June 2014 with 2,689 respondents and compare responses from Germany, Great Britain, the United States, Mexico, and Spain. We assess open-ended responses for a variety of topics (e.g., national identity, gender attitudes, and citizenship) with these indicators and evaluate whether they arrive at similar or contradictory conclusions about response quality. We find that all indicators are potentially biased in a cross-national context due to linguistic and cultural reasons and that the bias differs in prevalence across topics. Therefore, we recommend using multiple indicators as well as items covering a range of topics when evaluating response quality in open-ended questions across countries.
AB - Methodological studies usually gauge response quality in narrative open-ended questions with the proportion of nonresponse, response length, response time, and number of themes mentioned by respondents. However, not all of these indicators may be comparable and appropriate for evaluating open-ended questions in a cross-national context. This study assesses the cross-national appropriateness of these indicators and their potential bias. For the analysis, we use data from two web surveys conducted in May 2014 with 2,685 respondents and in June 2014 with 2,689 respondents and compare responses from Germany, Great Britain, the United States, Mexico, and Spain. We assess open-ended responses for a variety of topics (e.g., national identity, gender attitudes, and citizenship) with these indicators and evaluate whether they arrive at similar or contradictory conclusions about response quality. We find that all indicators are potentially biased in a cross-national context due to linguistic and cultural reasons and that the bias differs in prevalence across topics. Therefore, we recommend using multiple indicators as well as items covering a range of topics when evaluating response quality in open-ended questions across countries.
KW - comparability
KW - cross-cultural
KW - cross-national
KW - indicators
KW - open-ended questions
KW - response quality
KW - web probing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070296337&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0894439319859848
DO - 10.1177/0894439319859848
M3 - Article
SN - 0894-4393
VL - 39
SP - 434
EP - 455
JO - Social Science Computer Review
JF - Social Science Computer Review
IS - 3
ER -