Advanced search
1 file | 169.80 KB

Using ad hoc measures for response styles: a cautionary note

(2010) QUALITY & QUANTITY. 44(4). p.761-775
Author
Organization
Abstract
This research note addresses the challenge of how to optimally measure acquiescence response style (ARS) and extreme response style (ERS). This is of crucial importance in assessing results from studies that have tried to identify antecedents of response styles (such as age, education level, national culture). Using survey data from the Netherlands, a comparison is made between the traditional method and a more recently proposed method of measuring ARS and ERS (i.e., the convergent validity across both methods is assessed). The traditional method is based on an ad hoc set of related items. The alternative method uses a set of randomly sampled items to optimize heterogeneity and representativeness of the items. It is found that the traditional method may lead to response style measures that are suboptimal for estimating levels of ARS and ERS as well as relations of ARS and ERS with other variables (like hypothesized antecedents). Recommendations on how to measure response styles are provided.
Keywords
INSTRUMENT FRL, Acquiescence/extreme response style, MARKETING-RESEARCH, RATING-SCALES, ACQUIESCENCE, EXTREME, BIAS, COUNTRIES, EDUCATION, Response styles, Between-method convergent validity, Representative indicators for response styles (RIRS)

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 169.80 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
De Beuckelaer, Alain, Anouk Rutten, and Bert Weijters. 2010. “Using Ad Hoc Measures for Response Styles: a Cautionary Note.” Quality & Quantity 44 (4): 761–775.
APA
De Beuckelaer, Alain, Rutten, A., & Weijters, B. (2010). Using ad hoc measures for response styles: a cautionary note. QUALITY & QUANTITY, 44(4), 761–775.
Vancouver
1.
De Beuckelaer A, Rutten A, Weijters B. Using ad hoc measures for response styles: a cautionary note. QUALITY & QUANTITY. 2010;44(4):761–75.
MLA
De Beuckelaer, Alain, Anouk Rutten, and Bert Weijters. “Using Ad Hoc Measures for Response Styles: a Cautionary Note.” QUALITY & QUANTITY 44.4 (2010): 761–775. Print.
@article{1972817,
  abstract     = {This research note addresses the challenge of how to optimally measure acquiescence response style (ARS) and extreme response style (ERS). This is of crucial importance in assessing results from studies that have tried to identify antecedents of response styles (such as age, education level, national culture). Using survey data from the Netherlands, a comparison is made between the traditional method and a more recently proposed method of measuring ARS and ERS (i.e., the convergent validity across both methods is assessed). The traditional method is based on an ad hoc set of related items. The alternative method uses a set of randomly sampled items to optimize heterogeneity and representativeness of the items. It is found that the traditional method may lead to response style measures that are suboptimal for estimating levels of ARS and ERS as well as relations of ARS and ERS with other variables (like hypothesized antecedents). Recommendations on how to measure response styles are provided.},
  author       = {De Beuckelaer, Alain and Rutten, Anouk  and Weijters, Bert},
  issn         = {0033-5177},
  journal      = {QUALITY \& QUANTITY},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {761--775},
  title        = {Using ad hoc measures for response styles: a cautionary note},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135-009-9225-z},
  volume       = {44},
  year         = {2010},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: