Although comprehension is critical to the survey response process, much about it remains unknown. Research has shown that concepts can be clarified through the use of definitions, instructions or examples, but respondents do not necessarily attend to these clarifications. This dissertation presents the results of three experiments designed to investigate where and how to present clarifying information most effectively. In the first experiment, eight study questions, modeled after questions in major federal surveys, were administered as part of a Web survey. The results suggest that clarification improves comprehension of the questions. There is some evidence from that initial experiment that respondents anticipate the end of a question and are more likely to ignore clarification that comes after the question than before it. However, there is considerable evidence to suggest that clarifications are most effective when they are incorporated into a series of questions. A second experiment was conducted in both a Web and Interactive Voice Response (IVR) survey. IVR was chosen because it controlled for the effects of interviewers. The results of this experiment suggest that readers appear no more capable of comprehending complex clarification than listeners. In both channels, instructions were least likely to be followed when they were presented after the question, more likely to be followed when they were placed before the question, and most likely to be followed when they were incorporated into a series of questions. Finally, in a third experiment, five variables were varied to examine the use of examples in survey questions. Broad categories elicited higher reports than narrow categories and frequently consumed examples elicited higher reports than infrequently consumed examples. The implication of this final study is that the choice of categories and examples require careful consideration, as this choice will influence respondents' answers, but it does not seem to matter where and how a short list of examples are presented.
|Commitee:||Abraham, Katharine G., Conrad, Frederick G., Norman, Kent L., Schwarz, Norbert|
|School:||University of Maryland, College Park|
|School Location:||United States -- Maryland|
|Source:||DAI-B 72/10, Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Keywords:||Mixed mode surveys, Response process, Survery comprehension, Survey methodology, Survey questions|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be