The consistency of question‐order bias in a changing political context

Author:

Van Dooren Wouter1ORCID,Hjortskov Morten2ORCID,De Vadder Steven F.1ORCID,Verhoest Koen1

Affiliation:

1. Research Group Politics and Public Governance University of Antwerp Antwerp Belgium

2. VIVE—The Danish Center for Social Science Research Aarhus Denmark

Abstract

AbstractQuestion‐order bias is a well‐known weakness of surveys commonly used in public administration research. However, most research on question‐order bias uses question‐order experiments that are relatively small, performed in one context, and rarely replicated. We carry out six question‐order experiments in six large‐scale Belgian surveys conducted during the COVID‐19 pandemic. All experiments vary whether the respondents see questions regarding the effectiveness of pandemic governance or trust in different actors first. Results show that question‐order effects are real and reasonably consistent across the high‐powered replications, despite the changing political context of the pandemic. However, the direction of the effects largely changes when we flip the order of the trust outcome questions in the last three experiments, which sheds light on an underappreciated point: question‐order bias also seems to exist within batteries of seemingly similar outcome questions.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3