designing a questionnaire - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 97
About This Presentation
Title:

designing a questionnaire

Description:

designing a questionnaire Objectives in designing questionnaires There are 3 main objectives are: To maximise the proportion of subjects answering our questionnaire ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:291
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 98
Provided by: tdps
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: designing a questionnaire


1
designing a questionnaire
2
Objectives in designing questionnaires
  • There are 3 main objectives are
  • To maximise the proportion of subjects answering
    our questionnaire - that is, the response rate.
  • To obtain accurate relevant information for our
    survey.
  • In order to obtain accurate relevant information,
    we have to give some thought to what questions we
    ask, how we ask them, the order we ask them in,
    and the general layout of the questionnaire.
  • To maximise our response rate,
  • we have to consider carefully how we administer
    the questionnaire, establish rapport, explain the
    purpose of the survey, and remind those who have
    not responded. The length of the questionnaire
    should be appropriate.

3
Deciding what to ask
  • There are three potential types of information
  • (1) Information we are primarily interested
    in-that is, dependent variables.
  • (2) Information which might explain the
    dependent variables-that is, independent
    variables.
  • (3) Other factors related to both dependent and
    independent factors which may distort the
    results and have to be adjusted for - that is,
    confounding variables.

4
Qualities of a Good Question
  • Evokes the truth.
  • Questions must be non-threatening.
  • When a respondent is concerned about the
    consequences of answering a question in a
    particular manner, there is a good possibility
    that the answer will not be truthful.
  • Anonymous questionnaires that contain no
    identifying information are more likely to
    produce honest responses than those identifying
    the respondent.
  • If your questionnaire does contain sensitive
    items, be sure to clearly state your policy on
    confidentiality.

5
  • Asks for an answer on only one dimension or only
    one piece of information at a time (NO DOUBLE
    BARREL QUESTIONS)
  • The purpose of a survey is to find out
    information. A question that asks for a response
    on more than one dimension will not provide the
    information you are seeking.
  • For example, a researcher investigating a new
    food snack asks
  • "Do you like the texture and flavor of the
    snack?"
  • If a respondent answers "no", then the
    researcher will not know if the respondent
    dislikes the texture or the flavor, or both.

6
  • Another question asks, "Were you satisfied with
    the quality of our food and service?"
  • Again, if the respondent answers "no", there is
    no way to know whether the quality of the food,
    service, or both were unsatisfactory.
  • A good question asks for only one "bit" of
    information.
  • Another example, "Please rate the lecture in
    terms of its content and presentation" asks for
    two pieces of information at the same time. It
    should be divided into two parts
  • "Please rate the lecture in terms of (a) its
    content, (b) its presentation."

7
  • Can accommodate all possible answers.
  • Multiple choice items are the most popular type
    of survey questions because they are generally
    the easiest for a respondent to answer and the
    easiest to analyze.
  • Asking a question that does not accommodate all
    possible responses can confuse and frustrate the
    respondent. For example, consider the question

8
  • What brand of computer do you own? __       A.
    IBM PC       B. Apple
  • Clearly, there are many problems with this
    question. What if the respondent doesn't own a
    microcomputer? What if he owns a different brand
    of computer? What if he owns both an IBM PC and
    an Apple? There are two ways to correct this kind
    of problem.

9
  • The first way is to make each response a separate
    dichotomous item on the questionnaire. For
    example
  • Do you own an IBM PC? (circle Yes or No)
  • Do you own an Apple computer? (circle Yes or No)

10
  • Another way to correct the problem is to add the
    necessary response categories and allow multiple
    responses. This is the preferable method because
    it provides more information than the previous
    method.
  • What brand of computer do you own?(Check all
    that apply)
  • __ Do not own a computer__ IBM PC__ Apple__
    Other

11
  • Has mutually exclusive options.
  • A good question leaves no ambiguity in the mind
    of the respondent. There should be only one
    correct or appropriate choice for the respondent
    to make. An obvious example is
  • Where did you grow up? __
  • A. countryB. farmC. city
  • A person who grew up on a farm in the country
    would not know whether to select choice A or B.
    This question would not provide meaningful
    information. Worse than that, it could frustrate
    the respondent and the questionnaire might find
    its way to the trash.

12
  • Produces variability of responses.
  • When a question produces no variability in
    responses, we are left with considerable
    uncertainty about why we asked the question and
    what we learned from the information.
  • If a question does not produce variability in
    responses, it will not be possible to perform any
    statistical analyses on the item. For example
  • What do you think about this report? __
  • A. It's the worst report I've readB. It's
    somewhere between the worst and bestC. It's the
    best report I've read

13
  • Since almost all responses would be choice B,
    very little information is learned It's
    somewhere between the worst and best.
  • Design your questions so they are sensitive to
    differences between respondents. As another
    example
  • Are you against drug abuse? (circle Yes or No)
  • Again, there would be very little variability in
    responses and we'd be left wondering why we asked
    the question in the first place.

14
  • Follows comfortably from the previous question.
  • Writing a questionnaire is similar to writing
    anything else. Transitions between questions
    should be smooth. Grouping questions that are
    similar will make the questionnaire easier to
    complete, and the respondent will feel more
    comfortable. Questionnaires that jump from one
    unrelated topic to another feel disjointed and
    are not likely to produce high response rates

15
  • Does not presuppose a certain state of affairs.
  • Among the most subtle mistakes in questionnaire
    design are questions that make an unwarranted
    assumption. An example of this type of mistake
    is
  • Are you satisfied with your current auto
    insurance? (Yes or No)
  • This question will present a problem for someone
    who does not currently have auto insurance. Write
    your questions so they apply to everyone. This
    often means simply adding an additional response
    category. Are you satisfied with your current
    auto insurance?
  • ___ Yes___ No___ Don't have auto insurance

16
  • One of the most common mistaken assumptions is
    that the respondent knows the correct answer to
    the question. Industry surveys often contain very
    specific questions that the respondent may not
    know the answer to. For example
  • What percent of your budget do you spend on
    direct mail advertising? ____
  • Very few people would know the answer to this
    question without looking it up, and very few
    respondents will take the time and effort to look
    it up. If you ask a question similar to this, it
    is important to understand that the responses are
    rough estimates and there is a strong likelihood
    of error.

17
  • Does not imply a desired answer.
  • The wording of a question is extremely important.
    We are striving for objectivity in our surveys
    and, therefore, must be careful not to lead the
    respondent into giving the answer we would like
    to receive.
  • Leading questions are usually easily spotted
    because they use negative phraseology. As
    examples
  • Wouldn't you like to receive our free brochure?
  • Don't you think the government is spending too
    much money?

18
  • Does not use emotionally loaded or vaguely
    defined words. This is one of the areas
    overlooked by both beginners and experienced
    researchers.
  • Quantifying adjectives (e.g., most, least,
    majority) are frequently used in questions.
  • It is important to understand that these
    adjectives mean different things to different
    people.

19
  • Does not use unfamiliar words or abbreviations.
    Remember who your audience is and write your
    questionnaire for them.
  • Do not use uncommon words or compound sentences.
    Write short sentences. Abbreviations are okay if
    you are absolutely certain that every single
    respondent will understand their meanings.
  • If there is any doubt at all, do not use the
    abbreviation. The following question might be
    okay if all the respondents are educated people ,
    but it would not be a good question for the
    general public.
  • What was your SES status? ______

20
  • Is not dependent on responses to previous
    questions. Branching in written questionnaires
    should be avoided.
  • While branching can be used as an effective
    probing technique in telephone and face-to-face
    interviews, it should not be used in written
    questionnaires because it sometimes confuses
    respondents. An example of branching is
  • 1. Do you currently have a life insurance policy
    ? (Yes or No) If no, go to question 3
  • 2. How much is your annual life insurance premium
    ? _________

21
  • Does not ask respondent to order or rank a series
    of more than five items.
  • Questions asking respondents to rank items by
    importance should be avoided.
  • This becomes increasingly difficult as the number
    of items increases, and the answers become less
    reliable.
  • This becomes especially problematic when asking
    respondents to assign a percentage to a series of
    items.
  • In order to successfully complete this task, the
    respondent must mentally continue to re-adjust
    his answers until they total one hundred percent.
  • Limiting the number of items to five will make it
    easier for the respondent to answer.

22
The Order of the Questions
  • Items on a questionnaire should be grouped into
    logically coherent sections.
  • Grouping questions that are similar will make the
    questionnaire easier to complete, and the
    respondent will feel more comfortable.
  • Questions that use the same response formats, or
    those that cover a specific topic, should appear
    together

23
  • Each question should follow comfortably from the
    previous question.
  • Writing a questionnaire is similar to writing
    anything else.
  • Transitions between questions should be smooth.
  • Questionnaires that jump from one unrelated topic
    to another feel disjointed and are not likely to
    produce high response rates

24
  • Arranging the questions
  • The order of the questions is also important.
    Some general rules are
  • Go from general to particular.
  • Go from easy to difficult.
  • Go from factual to abstract.
  • Start with closed format
  • questions.
  • Start with questions relevant to
  • the main subject.
  • Do not start with demographic
  • and personal questions.

25
  • It is useful to use a variety of question format
    to maintain the respondents' interest.
  • When a series of semantic differential scales
    are used, it may be a good idea to mix positive
    negative - for example, interesting to dull -
    with negative positive - for example, useless to
    useful - scales.
  • This might make the respondents think more and
    avoid the tendency to tick the same response for
    every question.

26
Question Wording
  • The wording of a question is extremely important.
    Researchers strive for objectivity in surveys
    and, therefore, must be careful not to lead the
    respondent into giving a desired answer.
    Unfortunately, the effects of question wording
    are one of the least understood areas of
    questionnaire research.

27
  • Many investigators have confirmed that slight
    changes in the way questions are worded can have
    a significant impact on how people respond.
  • Several authors have reported that minor changes
    in question wording can produce more than a 25
    percent difference in people's opinions

28
  • Several investigators have looked at the effects
    of modifying adjectives and adverbs. Words like
    usually, often, sometimes, occasionally, seldom,
    and rarely are "commonly" used in questionnaires,
    although it is clear that they do not mean the
    same thing to all people.
  • Some adjectives have high variability and others
    have low variability. The following adjectives
    have highly variable meanings and should be
    avoided in surveys a clear mandate, most,
    numerous, a substantial majority, a minority of,
    a large proportion of, a significant number of,
    many, a considerable number of, and several.
    Other adjectives produce less variability and
    generally have more shared meaning. These are
    lots, almost all, virtually all, nearly all, a
    majority of, a consensus of, a small number of,
    not very many of, almost none, hardly any, a
    couple, and a few.

29
  • Use short and simple sentences
  • Short, simple sentences are generally less
    confusing and ambiguous than long, complex ones.
    As a rule of thumb, most sentences should contain
    one or two clauses. Sentences with more than
    three clauses should be rephrased.

30
  • Avoid negatives if possible
  • Negatives should be used only sparingly. For
    example, instead of asking students whether they
    agree with the statement, "Small group teaching
    should not be abolished," the statement should be
    rephrased as, "Small group teaching should
    continue." Double negatives should always be
    avoided.

31
  • Ask precise questions
  • Questions may be ambiguous because a word or term
    may have a different meaning.
  • For example, if we ask students to rate their
    interest in "medicine," this term might mean
    "general medicine" (as opposed to general
    surgery) to some, but inclusive of all clinical
    specialties (as opposed to professions outside
    medicine) to others.

32
  • Another source of ambiguity is a failure to
    specify a frame of reference.
  • For example, in the question, "How often did you
    borrow books from your library?" the time
    reference is missing. It might be rephrased as,
    "How many books have you borrowed from the
    library within the past six months altogether?"

33
  • Ensure those you ask have the necessary knowledge
  • For example, in a survey of university lecturers
    on recent changes in higher education, the
    question,
  • "Do you agree with the recommendations in the
    Report on Higher Education" is unsatisfactory for
    several reasons.
  • Not only does it ask for several pieces of
    information at the same time as there are several
    recommendations in the report, the question also
    assumes that all lecturers know about the
    relevant recommendations.

34
  • Level of details
  • It is important to ask for the exact level of
    details required.
  • On the one hand, you might not be able to fulfil
    the purposes of the survey if you omit to ask
    essential details.
  • On the other hand, it is important to avoid
    unnecessary details.
  • People are less inclined to complete long
    questionnaires.
  • This is particularly important for confidential
    sensitive information, such as personal financial
    matters or marital relationship issues.

35
  • Handling Sensitive Issues
  • It is often difficult to obtain truthful answers
    to sensitive questions. Clearly, the question,
    "Have you ever copied other students' answers in
    a degree exam?" is likely to produce either no
    response or negative responses. Less direct
    approaches have been suggested.
  • Firstly, the casual approach "By the way, do you
    happen to have copied other students' answers in
    a degree exam?" may be used as a last part of
    another decoy question.
  • Secondly, the numbered card approach "Please
    tick one or more of the following items which
    correspond to how you have answered degree
    examination questions in the past." In the list
    of items, include "copy from other students" as
    one of many items.

36
  • Thirdly, the everybody approach "As we all know,
    most university students have copied other
    students' answers in degree exams. Do you happen
    to be one of them?"
  • Fourthly, other people approach. This approach
    was used in the recent medical student survey. In
    this survey, students were given the scenario,
    Jalil copies answers in a degree exam from
    Jamal." They were then asked, "Do you feel Jalil
    is wrong, what penalty should be imposed for
    Jalil, and have you done or would you consider
    doing the above?"

37
  • Length of questionnaire
  • There are no universal agreements about the
    optimal length of questionnaires.
  • It probably depends on the type of respondents.
  • However, short simple questionnaires usually
    attract higher response rates than long complex
    ones.
  • In a survey of stroke survivors both the
    response rate and the proportion of completed
    forms were higher for a shorter questionnaire
    (six questions with a visual analogue scale)
    compared with a longer and more complex
    questionnaire (with 34 questions).

38
  • Write in everyday terms.Avoid internal jargon.
    Many corporations have abbreviations or acronyms
    for products and services which are not familiar
    to custome
  • Follow good business writing practices.Write
    short, simple questions. Be clear and to the
    point. Avoid errors in spelling, grammar and
    usage.

39
  • Use consistent scales.
  • All rating scales should mimic the first one
    used.
  • It can confuse respondents if you change from,
    for example, a five point to a seven point scale.
  • Keep the scales going the same way. In other
    words, if '5' is high on the first scale, don't
    make '1' high on the next.
  • Use similar wording for the anchors.
  • Finally, group like questions under the same
    scale. If you do need to change scales, wait
    until you reach a new section of the
    questionnaire.

40
  • Use consistent wording.
  • The use of similar phrases for the text of the
    survey can unify your questionnaire.
  • For example, questions can be set up with a lead
    phrase which is a phrase that can be used to lead
    off each question. For example
  • How satisfied are you that our staff is
  • Responsive to your service requests .......
  • Knowledgeable about products .............
  • Knowledgeable about your business........

41
  • Avoid asking more than one
  • question at a time.
  • This is known as asking a 'double barreled'
    question. A typical double barreled question
    "Sales reps are polite and responsive." While the
    sales reps may be polite they may not be
    responsive, or vice versa. The respondent will be
    forced to rate one attribute differently from
    their true feelings. Consequently, data
    interpretation will be questionable.

42
  • Provide directions.
  • It is important to let the respondent know what
    to do on any particular question however, it is
    just as important to avoid complicated
    directions.
  • Make the survey as easy as possible for your
    respondents by using phrases such as 'Mark all
    that apply,' and 'Mark only one.'
  • Avoid asking them to calculate anything, such as
    percentages, and try to avoid the use of skip
    patterns.

43
  • Analysis of the responses and the interviewers'
    comments are used to improve the questionnaire.
  • Ideally, there should be sufficient variations
    in responses among respondents each question
    should measure different qualities - that is, the
    responses between any two items should not be
    very strongly correlated - and the non-response
    rate should be low. In the third phase the pilot
    test is polished to improve the question order,
    filter questions, and layout.

44
Format of responses
45
Format of responses
  • The responses can be in open or closed formats.
    In an open ended question, the respondents can
    formulate their own answers. In closed format,
    respondents are forced to choose between several
    given options. What are the advantages of each of
    these formats?
  • It is possible to use a mixture of the two
    formats- for example, give a list of options,
    with the final option of "other" followed by a
    space for respondents to fill in other
    alternatives.
  • There are several forced choice formats. Out of
    these formats, ranking is probably least
    frequently used, as the responses are relatively
    difficult to record and analyse.

46
Closed-that is, forced choice-format
  • Easy and quick to fill in
  • Minimise discrimination against the less literate
    (in self administered questionnaire) or the less
    articulate (in interview questionnaire)
  • Easy to code, record, and analyse results
    quantitatively
  • Easy to report results

47
  • Example "How satisfied are you with your job?"
    (Circle the number that represents your response)
  • Very disatisfied    Dissatisfied    Neutral   
    Satisfied    Very satisfied      
    1                  2               
    3          4             5
  •  

48
  • Example "What is your marital status?" (Check the
    box that applies)
  • Single, never married
  • Married
  • Divorced
  • Separated
  • Widowed
  • Other_____

49
Please cicle your respons
Questions Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Very satisfied
How satisfied are you with your working conditions? 1 2 3 4
How satisfied are you with your pay? 1 2 3 4
How satisfied are you with your supervisor?1 1 2 3 4
50
Open format
  • Advantages
  • Allows exploration of the range of possible
    themes arising from an issue
  • Can be used even if a comprehensive range of
    alternative choices cannot be compiled

51
Choosing the Right Scale
  • Choosing a scale for your survey instrument is an
    important decision that will shape the
    information you collect. Each scale has
    variations, some more reliable than others.
  • Even vs. Odd
  • Number of Points
  • Defining Your Scale

52
  • Even vs. Odd
  • Even numbered scales can more effectively
    discriminate between satisfied or unsatisfied
    customers because there is not a neutral option.
  • However, this clear division may cause hesitation
    for respondents who are neutral in regard to a
    survey item.
  • Without a midpoint option, respondents often
    choose a positive response, creating positively
    skewed data.
  • Carefully consider whether a clear division
    between positive and negative responses is
    necessary, or whether a midpoint will be more
    appropriate for your information needs.

53
  • Number of Points
  • In survey research, scales commonly range from 2
    to 10 points.
  • The number of points for your scale should be
    determined by how you intend to use the data.
  • Although seven to ten point scales may seem to
    gather more discriminating information, there is
    debate whether respondents actually discriminate
    carefully enough when filling out a questionnaire
    to make these scales valuable.
  • Also, these scales are often collapsed into
    three or five point scales for reporting
    purposes.
  • Four and five point scales are more highly
    recommended Two and three point scales offer
    little discriminative value and are rarely
    recommended.

54
Defining Your Scale
  • Once the number of points on a scale has been
    decided, it is important to determine the labels
    for each scale point, or in some cases, whether
    or not you will use any labels.
  • For example, an agreement scale could be set up
    like this
  • Strongly Agree Strongly
    Disagree
  • 5 4 3 2 1

55
  • Though this may be true, it is also important
    that each respondent understand the meaning of
    each scale point.
  • By labeling each scale point, all respondents
    attach the same word to a numerical value.
  • This helps avoid respondent misinterpretation of
    scale definitions.
  • Additionally, verbally defining each scale point
    allows reports to be written in more concrete
    terms such as "x percentage were satisfied."

56
Four-point Requirements Scale
  • Receives high marks for discrimination and
    reliability. A leading sentence might be, "Please
    indicate how well Company Z met your
    requirements.
  • Exceeded Met Nearly Met Missed
  • 4 3 2 1
  • The option of "Nearly Met" serves well to capture
    data from respondents who are somewhat
    unsatisfied but prefer to choose positive
    responses.

57
Five-point Expectations Scale
  • Receives high marks for discrimination and
    reliability.
  • A leading sentence might be, "In terms of your
    expectations, please rate the performance of
    Company Z.
  • Significantly Significantly Above
    Above Met Below Below
  • 5 4 3 2 1

58
  • While these scales have been shown to be
    effective in collecting accurate data, a good
    scale cannot compensate for poorly worded items.
  • Accurate, reliable data depends on a combination
    of the proper scale and correctly written items,
    as well as proper survey administration

59
  • Open-ended QuestionsHow much information or
    detail do you need in open-ended questions? In
    general, more detailed information can be
    gathered when an interviewer probes and clarifies
    responses, than when respondents are asked to
    write in their own response.
  • Visual AidsWill the respondent need to see
    graphs or figures? If so, chances are a phone
    survey will not work.
  • Skip PatternsAre there complex skip patterns
    requiring respondents to skip to other questions
    based on answers to previous questions? If so,
    trained interviews or properly programmed
    computer methods will ensure that respondents
    answer the correct questions.

60
  • There are several ways of administering
    questionnaires.
  • They may be self administered or read out by
    interviewers.
  • Self administered questionnaires may be sent by
    post, email, or electronically online.
  • Interview administered questionnaires may be by
    telephone or face to face.
  • Advantages of self administered questionnaires
    include
  • Cheap and easy to administer.
  • Preserve confidentiality.
  • Can be completed at respondent's convenience.
  • Can be administered in a standard manner.

61
.
  • Nonsence or error data
  • SD D X A SA, X should be there because it is
    not of the scale
  • Elimate the question. If several respondents
    give similar nonsense data, your isntrument is
    probably in error
  • Other categories
  • Not Applicable you may have too many respondents
    giving NA. when more than 15-20 gave NA, then
    the validity of the Q is in question. When item
    has more than 20 NA, elimate the item for
    analysis, keep it an eliminate the individual.
    One way is to be sure that all item apply to yur
    respondents and do not use NA
  • NA means it does not apply to me Neutral mean it
    applies to me but I am neutral in my opinion

62
Validity of questionnaires
63
What is validity?
  • According to the American Psychological
    Association, validity "...refers to the
    appropriateness, meaningfulness, and usefulness
    of the specific inferences made from test
    scores." (Standards for Psychological and
    Educational Testing, 1985, p. 9).
  • In other words, if your findings need to be
    appropriate, meaningful and useful, they need to
    be valid.
  • Validity refers to whether the questionnaire or
    survey measures what it intends to measure. 

64
  • An instrument that is a valid measure of third
    grader's math skills probably is not a valid
    measure of high school student's math skills.
  • An instrument that is a valid predictor of how
    well students might do in school, may not be a
    valid measure of how well they will do once they
    complete school. 
  • So we never say that an instrument is valid or
    not valid...we say it is valid for a specific
    purpose with a specific group of people.

65
  • The validity of a questionnaire relies first and
    foremost on reliability.  If the questionnaire
    cannot be shown to be reliable, there is no
    discussion of validity.  But there is good
    news.  Demonstrating validity is easy, compared
    to reliability.  If you have reached this point
    and have a reliable instrument for measuring the
    issues or phenomena you are after, demonstrating
    its validity will not be difficult.

66
Types of Validity
  • Everyone agrees that validity is important, but
    what type of validity are we talking about?
  • three main types of validity
  • content,
  • criterion-related, and
  • construct validity.

67
Content Validity
  • Content validity determines if the survey items
    are representative of the topic being measured.
  • You need to
  • Define you must clearly state what you are
    interested in measuring, for example 'Quality.'
  • Choose the specific aspects which require
    feedback, for example, 'Error Rate.'
  • Judge whether your items relate to the
    definitions you developed and adequately cover
    all aspects whether the items are representative
    of the topic.

68
  • Example
  • Specialists in the content measured by the
    instrument are asked to judge the appropriateness
    of the items on the instrument.
  • Do they cover the breath of the content area
    (does the instrument contain a representative
    sample of the content being assessed)?
  • Are they in a format that is appropriate for
    those using the instrument?
  • A test that is intended to measure the quality of
    science instruction in fifth grade, should cover
    material covered in the fifth grade science
    course in a manner appropriate for fifth graders.
  • A national science test might not be a valid
    measure of local science instruction, although it
    might be a valid measure of national science
    standards.

69
  • Researchers aim to study mathematical learning
    and create a survey to test for mathematical
    skill. If these researchers only tested for
    multiplication and then drew conclusions from
    that survey, their study would not show content
    validity because it excludes other mathematical
    functions.
  • A researcher needing to measure an attitude like
    self-esteem must decide what constitutes a
    relevant domain of content for that attitude.
  • You must define your content domain

70
Criterion-Related Validity
  • Criterion-related validation relies on
    statistical analyses rather than judgments as in
    content validation.
  • Criterion-related validation involves calculating
    a 'validity coefficient' by correlating the
    survey items with another measure (criteria)
    already known to be related to other aspects of
    the attribute.
  • For example, if satisfaction with the service
    department relates to the number of friends one
    refers to the service department, then we could
    correlate scores on a measure of satisfaction to
    an index of referrals.

71
Construct Validity
  • Determine the construct to be measured, for
    example, 'Quality.'
  • Determine relationship between the construct and
    other constructs, for example, 'Satisfaction.'
  • Examine pattern of relationships

72
(No Transcript)
73
Reliability of questionnaires
74
  • Why Does Reliability Matter?
  • A questionnaire, will always produce numerical
    results, even if they're meaningless. 
  • You could be making business decisions based on
    survey results that don't mean anything. 
  • Only a test of reliability can tell you if you
    should trust the results..

75
  • What Is Reliability?
  • The most common definitions include descriptions
    such as stability, repeatability, and accuracy.
  • In the context of survey design, reliability is
    essentially the extent to which a survey will
    provide the same results with repeated
    measurement.
  • An example will make this statement clear.

76
  • Non-technically speaking, a reliable
    questionnaire is one that that would give the
    same results if you used it repeatedly with the
    same group. 
  • That may sound funny because most organizations
    don't administer a questionnaire to the same
    group twice. 
  • But if they did, they would learn how reliable
    their questionnaire is, because a reliable survey
    will give the same results on Tuesday as it did
    the previous Monday.

77
  • Reliability is a property of the measuring
    instrument. 
  • If you are like many people, you probably get on
    your bathroom scale in the morning, look at the
    weight displayed, then step off, and do it
    again. 
  • You have learned that what is displayed by a
    bathroom scale the first time is not always
    exactly the same as the second, but it is usually
    very close.

78
  • What if one morning you weighed yourself, then a
    second time, and the second weight displayed was
    5 lbs. heavier than the first? 
  • You would probably step off, then weigh yourself
    a third time.  What if it was now 4 lbs. lighter
    than the first? 
  • Would you still be concerned about your weight? 
    Or would you be more concerned about finding out
    what's "wrong" with the scale? 
  • What's wrong is that your scale has become
    unreliable.  You can see unreliability by
    repeatedly measuring the same thing. 
  • And when you know the scale is unreliable, you
    don't even try to measure your weight, you
    concentrate on fixing the scale first.

79
  • If you questionnaire is unreliable, it's like
    trying to measure the length of something with a
    rubber tape measure. 
  • You could make your marks at precise intervals,
    but the flexibility of the material would destroy
    its reliability. 
  • Most questionnaires that use rating scales to
    record people's opinions are like rubber tape
    measures.

80
  • Reliability
  • The ability of an instrument to measure
    consistently with relative absence of error. The
    higher the reliability coefficient, the more
    confidence you can have in the score.
  • .90 and upExcellent!
  • .80-.89.Good
  • .70-.79.Adequate
  • Below .70May have limited applicability
  • Source Testing and Assessment An Employers
    Guide to Good Practices U.S. Dept of Labor 1999

81
  • To understand reliability coefficients, a brief
    discussion of the components of a score will be
    helpful. An observed or obtained score on an
    instrument can be divided into two parts.
    Observed Score True Score Error
  • An instrument can be said to be reliable if it
    accurately reflects true scores. Or in other
    words, an instrument can said to be reliable to
    the extent that it minimizes the error component.
    So, the reliability coefficient is the proportion
    of true variability to the total obtained
    variability.
  • Therefore, if you get a reliability coefficient
    of .85, this means that 85 percent of the
    variability in obtained scores could be said to
    represent true individual differences and 15
    percent of the variability is due to random
    error.

82
  • Stability (produces the same results with
    repeated testing)  
  • Test-retest Parallel forms
  • Alternate forms

83
  • Internal-Consistency Measures of Reliability
  •   
  • Split-half reliability
  • Chronbachs alpha
  • Split-Half Reliability
  • One test is split into two halves and the
    correlation between the two halves is calculated.
    (Both halves of the test must be equal in
    content and difficulty.) Since the number of
    items is split in half, the Spearman-Brown
    formula must be employed to estimate reliability
    for the entire test.
  •  
  • Kuder-Richardson 20
  • A test of homogeneity (inter-item consistency)
    the K-R 20 compares the proportion of correct and
    incorrect responses to each of the items on the
    test. The K-R 20 is appropriate for tests in
    which items are either scored right or wrong.
  •  
  • Kuder-Richardson 21
  • This simpler formula is based upon the assumption
    that all items are of equal difficulty (rarely
    the case!)

84
  • Equivalence (instrument produces the same results
    when a equivalent instrument is used or there is
    consistency among researchers using the same
    instrument). Two equivalent forms of the test are
    administered to the same group of people. (It
    can be very difficult to develop two truly
    equivalent forms of a test.)  
  • Parallel items on Alternate forms Inter-rater
    reliability

85
  • if we measure an object using two rulers, one
    made of steel and one made of a rubber band, you
    would expect the steel ruler to provide
    relatively consistent or stable measurements
    (assuming the object was stable).
  • The rubber band ruler, on the other hand would
    probably provide a variable set of measurements.

86
  • How Do You Measure Reliability?
  • As is the case with validity, there are a number
    of different ways to assess the reliability of a
    survey. The method you choose will depend upon
    what you are trying to accomplish. Several ways
    we measure the reliability of an instrument
    include test-retest, split-halves, and internal
    consistency. All of these methods will result in
    a number between 0.00 and 1.00, with scores
    increasing as the survey becomes more reliable.
  • Basically there two reliability testing
    procedures
  • One administration and two administration
  • Two administration is a less desireble procedure

87
Stability
  • Test - Retest
  • As the name implies, test-retest reliability
    involves administering a survey to a group of
    individuals at one time and then re-administering
    the survey to the same individuals some later
    time.
  • The survey responses are then correlated and the
    resulting correlation is interpreted as the
    reliability of the instrument. This method
    clearly illustrates the notion of reliability as
    measurement consistency.
  • Unfortunately, there are some downsides to this
    approach.
  • Look for correlation score of at least .70 (tend
    to higher for short term retests 2 weeks and
    lower for long term retests gt1-2 months

88
  • Weaknessess
  • First, it is often very difficult to administer
    the same survey to the same person twice. Second,
    the act of measuring someone's attitudes (i.e.,
    satisfaction) can affect their attitude.
  • Specifically, asking people to report their
    satisfaction at time 1 can sensitize them to the
    issues and result in a change in scores at time 2
    (a phenomenon called reactivity), resulting in a
    low reliability estimate.
  • Finally, people remember their first response and
    respond in a way to maximize their consistency,
    not necessarily to reflect their attitude. This
    will result in inflated estimates of reliabilit

89
  • Parallel items on Alternate forms
  • Same population completing similar forms of the
    instruments before and after a short time period
    or one right after another
  • If items are truly parallel, they have identical
    true scores and identical error variances.
    Responses to parallel items will differ only with
    respect to random fluctuations.
  • Uses questions (items) that are comparable to
    each other and parallel. However, it is very
    difficult to prepare to two forms of a test that
    display the properties of parallel measures.
  • However, there are two forms of certain tests
    whose items are intended to measure the same
    thing and do not differ from each other in any
    systematic way.
  • The two sets of scores are correlated to produce
    a correlation coefficient

90
Homogeneity - Internal Consistency
  • Split Halves
  • An alternate approach to reliability requires us
    to split a survey in half and then correlate the
    two halves.
  • For example, if we had a twenty item survey
    assessing customer satisfaction with a sales
    associate, we could administer the survey to our
    sample, split the survey in half, and then
    correlate the two halves of the survey.
  • A reliable survey would result in strong
    correlations between the two halves.
  • The major problem associated with this approach
    is splitting the survey.
  • Every approach will probably result in a slightly
    different result, providing some confusion as to
    the actual reliability of the survey.

91
Formula for split half
  • r 2 r ½ ½
  • 1 r ½ ½
  • Where r ½ ½ is the pearson correlation between
    the two halves

92
  • Internal Consistency
  • A potential solution to the problems with the
    split-half approach is to use a measure of
    internal consistency.
  • Internal consistency considers the average
    correlation between all of the survey items and
    the number of survey items to provide an estimate
    of reliability.
  • A common measure of internal consistency is
    coefficient a Alpha or Cronbach's alpha KR20 or
    KR21.
  • The downside to alpha is that is more difficult
    to calculate than the other methods.
  • Luckily, however,many statistical programs will
    calculate this for you.
  • Item to total correlation Measures the
    correlation of each of the items to the total
    scale. Items with a low correlation can be
    deleted.

93
KR 20 for dichotomous itensKR 21 MC items
  • Where,
  • r is realibility estimate
  • K number of items on test
  • p proportion of sample who got item correct
  • q proportion of sample who got item wrong (1-p)
  • S x2 variance in sample
  • X mean on test
  • Formula for KR20
  • r K 1 (S x2 sum of pq)
  • K- 1 sx 2
  • Formula for KR21
  • R (KS x 2) X(K X)
  • S x 2 (K 1)

94
Factors influencing reliability
  • Test related factors
  • Length, test content, homogeniety of items,
    dificulty of items (too easy or too difficulty
    will reduice reliability)
  • Test taker
  • Heterogeneity hetero more spread
  • Attitude
  • Aptitude
  • Administration factor
  • - time limit
  • - opportunity to cheat

95
Raising reliability
  • Lengthen the intrument
  • Check the test item (clarity, reading level,
    format)
  • Make it median difficulty if it is an achievement
    test
  • Increase timi limit

96
  • Types of instrument
  • Dichotomous (T/F)
  • Multiple choice
  • Check all that apply
  • Rank the items
  • Rate the itesm that will be summed together
  • Likert scale
  • Demographic
  • One instrument with several domain which are
    measured by multiple items
  • Long instrument
  • Types of realibility procedures
  • KR20
  • KR21/alpha
  • Test/retest
  • Test/retest
  • Test/retest
  • Cronbach Alpha/KR21
  • None or percent or agreement
  • KR21/Croncbachs Alpha
  • Split half

97
(No Transcript)
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com