| Title |
A classification of response scale characteristics that affect data quality: a literature review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quality & Quantity, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11135-017-0533-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna DeCastellarnau |
| Abstract |
Quite a lot of research is available on the relationships between survey response scales' characteristics and the quality of responses. However, it is often difficult to extract practical rules for questionnaire design from the wide and often mixed amount of empirical evidence. The aim of this study is to provide first a classification of the characteristics of response scales, mentioned in the literature, that should be considered when developing a scale, and second a summary of the main conclusions extracted from the literature regarding the impact these characteristics have on data quality. Thus, this paper provides an updated and detailed classification of the design decisions that matter in questionnaire development, and a summary of what is said in the literature about their impact on data quality. It distinguishes between characteristics that have been demonstrated to have an impact, characteristics for which the impact has not been found, and characteristics for which research is still needed to make a conclusion. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 17% |
| Spain | 2 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 17% |
| Sweden | 1 | 8% |
| United States | 1 | 8% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 6 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 5 | 42% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 301 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 301 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 56 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 43 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 9% |
| Researcher | 25 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 6% |
| Other | 55 | 18% |
| Unknown | 76 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 52 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 39 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 16 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 4% |
| Other | 75 | 25% |
| Unknown | 84 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 December 2023.
All research outputs
#4,116,531
of 24,998,746 outputs
Outputs from Quality & Quantity
#77
of 699 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,526
of 321,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality & Quantity
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,998,746 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 699 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,553 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them