Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
American Journal of Evaluation
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (52)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schwarz, N.
Right arrow Articles by Oyserman, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Asking Questions About Behavior: Cognition, Communication, and Questionnaire Construction

Norbert Schwarz

University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106-1248, USA, norbert.schwarz{at}umich.edu

Daphna Oyserman

Evaluation researchers frequently obtain self-reports of behaviors, asking program participants to report on process and outcome-relevant behaviors. Unfortunately, reporting on one’s behavior poses a difficult cognitive task, and participants’ reports can be profoundly influenced by question wording, format, and context. We review the steps involved in answering a question about one’s behavior and highlight the underlying cognitive and communicative processes. We alert researchers to what can go wrong and provide theoretically grounded recommendations for pilot testing and questionnaire construction.

American Journal of Evaluation, Vol. 22, No. 2, 127-160 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/109821400102200202


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
School Psychology InternationalHome page
K. Koutrouba, E. Antonopoulou, G. Tsitsas, and E. Zenakou
An Investigation of Greek Teachers' Views on Parental Involvement in Education
School Psychology International, June 1, 2009; 30(3): 311 - 328.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics SocietyHome page
Y. Bogenstatter, F. Tschan, N. K. Semmer, M. Spychiger, M. Breuer, and S. Marsch
How Accurate Is Information Transmitted to Medical Professionals Joining a Medical Emergency? A Simulator Study
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, April 1, 2009; 51(2): 115 - 125.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Public Opin QHome page
M. Prior
The Immensely Inflated News Audience: Assessing Bias in Self-Reported News Exposure
Public Opin Q, March 18, 2009; (2009) nfp002v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
American Journal of EvaluationHome page
P. J. Taylor, D. F. Russ-Eft, and H. Taylor
Gilding the Outcome by Tarnishing the Past: Inflationary Biases in Retrospective Pretests
American Journal of Evaluation, March 1, 2009; 30(1): 31 - 43.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J Interpers ViolenceHome page
N. Zoe Hilton, A. M. Carter, G. T. Harris, and A. J. B. Sharpe
Does Using Nonnumerical Terms to Describe Risk Aid Violence Risk Communication?: Clinician Agreement and Decision Making
J Interpers Violence, February 1, 2008; 23(2): 171 - 188.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Psychoeducational AssessmentHome page
B. Shulruf, J. Hattie, and R. Dixon
Development of a New Measurement Tool for Individualism and Collectivism
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, December 1, 2007; 25(4): 385 - 401.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Field MethodsHome page
D. J. Hruschka, B. Cummings, D. C. St. John, J. Moore, G. Khumalo-Sakutukwa, and J. W. Carey
Fixed-Choice and Open-Ended Response Formats: A Comparison from HIV Prevention Research in Zimbabwe
Field Methods, May 1, 2004; 16(2): 184 - 202.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
American Journal of EvaluationHome page
M. Bamberger, J. Rugh, M. Church, and L. Fort
Shoestring Evaluation: Designing Impact Evaluations under Budget, Time and Data Constraints
American Journal of Evaluation, March 1, 2004; 25(1): 5 - 37.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
American Journal of EvaluationHome page
H. Preskill, B. Zuckerman, and B. Matthews
An Exploratory Study of Process Use: Findings and Implications for Future Research
American Journal of Evaluation, December 1, 2003; 24(4): 423 - 442.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
American Journal of EvaluationHome page
M. M. Mark
From the Editor
American Journal of Evaluation, March 1, 2003; 24(1): 1 - 3.
[PDF]


Home page
American Journal of EvaluationHome page
T. C. M. Lam and P. Bengo
A Comparison of Three Retrospective Self-reporting Methods of Measuring Change in Instructional Practice
American Journal of Evaluation, March 1, 2003; 24(1): 65 - 80.
[Abstract] [PDF]