Literature DB >> 35330704

Vague quantifiers demonstrate little susceptibility to frame of reference effects.

Marta Walentynowicz1,2, Stefan Schneider1, Doerte U Junghaenel1, Arthur A Stone1,3.   

Abstract

Comparison standards that people use when responding to survey questions, also called Frames of Reference (FoRs), can influence the validity of self-report responses. The effects of FoRs might be the stronger for items using vague quantifier (VQ) scales, which are particularly prominent in quality of life research, compared with numeric responses. This study aims to investigate the impact of FoRs on self-report measures by examining how imposing a specific FoR in survey questions affects (a) the response levels of VQ and numeric scales and (b) the relationship between VQs and a quantitative responses to the same question. A sample of 1,869 respondents rated their education, commute and sleep duration, medication use, and level of physical activity using both VQ and numeric formats. Participants were asked to compare themselves with the average US adult, with their friends who are about their age, or did not receive specific instructions regarding a reference for comparison. We found that FoR conditions did not influence the numeric responses. Among the VQ responses, only education attainment was affected by FoR. The association between the numeric responses and vague quantifiers was comparable across different FoR conditions. Our results showed that manipulating the use of interpersonal FoRs had limited effect on the responses, which suggests that at least some comparisons do not have a strong biasing effect on self-report measures. However, future research should confirm this finding for using other FoRs (e.g., historical or hypothetical comparisons) and other outcome measures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Frames of reference; comparison standards; self-report; survey research; vague quantifiers

Year:  2021        PMID: 35330704      PMCID: PMC8939886          DOI: 10.1007/s11482-020-09889-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Res Qual Life        ISSN: 1871-2576


  19 in total

1.  What lies behind the subjective evaluation of health status?

Authors:  Giora Kaplan; Orna Baron-Epel
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 4.634

2.  Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on Amazon Mechanical Turk.

Authors:  Eyal Peer; Joachim Vosgerau; Alessandro Acquisti
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2014-12

3.  Age effects and health appraisal: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  G Roberts
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 4.077

4.  MTurk Participants Have Substantially Lower Evaluative Subjective Well-Being Than Other Survey Participants.

Authors:  Arthur A Stone; Marta Walentynowicz; Stefan Schneider; Doerte U Junghaenel; Cheng K Wen
Journal:  Comput Human Behav       Date:  2019-01-04

5.  Relative to the general US population, chronic diseases are associated with poorer health-related quality of life as measured by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS).

Authors:  Nan E Rothrock; Ron D Hays; Karen Spritzer; Susan E Yount; William Riley; David Cella
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A New Source of Inexpensive, Yet High-Quality, Data?

Authors:  Michael Buhrmester; Tracy Kwang; Samuel D Gosling
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-02-03

7.  Context effects in survey ratings of health, symptoms, and satisfaction.

Authors:  Arthur A Stone; Joan E Broderick; Joseph E Schwartz; Norbert Schwarz
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Evaluation of item candidates: the PROMIS qualitative item review.

Authors:  Darren A DeWalt; Nan Rothrock; Susan Yount; Arthur A Stone
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  The meaning of vaguely quantified frequency response options on a quality of life scale depends on respondents' medical status and age.

Authors:  Stefan Schneider; Arthur A Stone
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-04-12       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  The effects of time frames on self-report.

Authors:  Marta Walentynowicz; Stefan Schneider; Arthur A Stone
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.