首页> 外文期刊>Social Indicators Research >Reliability, Validity and True Values in Surveys
【24h】

Reliability, Validity and True Values in Surveys

机译:调查的可靠性,有效性和真实价值

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

In general, it is assumed that distinct true values will be found behind what is actually measured in surveys. By acquiring sufficient knowledge of measurement error, its extent and nature, we are supposed to be able to obtain adequate knowledge of underlying properties. It could be maintained, however, that this idea of a stable and comprehensible underlying reality is often only a theoretical construction. The existence of a clear measurable reality can often be questioned on both theoretical and empirical grounds. This paper provides some arguments and some illustrative results based on method studies. One observation that is often made when examining survey data is that responses to similar questions have a tendency to show poor correspondence with each other. Also, responses to the same questions posed to the same people at different times tend to correspond not as well as might be expected. Data is presented that shows far greater inconsistency in contexts where people have to make judgements than in those where they provide descriptions. Also, much less consistency was found among people whose standpoints are relatively unclear. It seems plausible to interpret lack of consistency as partly an expression of difficulties on the part of respondents in adopting unequivocal stances. Consequently, inconsistency cannot be indiscriminately used to gauge the measuring instrument’s reliability. It is not possible to manage deficiencies by means of any simple methodological technique. If so, the instrument’s reliability will be consistently underestimated. Part of the uncertainty among individuals is then displaced into the measuring instrument. Uncertainty has to be handled also through stricter choices of questions, by using indicators of sufficient clarity, and by differentiating between clear and unclear standpoints.
机译:通常,假定在调查中实际测量的值后面会找到不同的真实值。通过获取有关测量误差,其范围和性质的足够知识,我们应该能够获得有关基础属性的足够知识。但是,可以维持这种关于稳定和可理解的潜在现实的想法通常只是理论上的建构。经常可以从理论和经验两个方面质疑一个明显的可测量现实的存在。本文基于方法研究提供了一些论据和一些说明性结果。检查调查数据时经常得出的一种观察结果是,对类似问题的回答趋向于显示彼此之间的对应性较差。同样,在不同时间对同一个人提出的相同问题的回答往往不尽人意。呈现的数据显示,在人们必须做出判断的情况下,与在提供描述的情况下相比,不一致的情况要严重得多。此外,在观点相对不清楚的人们中发现一致性的程度要差得多。将缺乏一致性解释为被访者在采取明确立场方面的困难的部分表达似乎是合理的。因此,不能随意使用不一致来衡量测量仪器的可靠性。不可能通过任何简单的方法技术来管理缺陷。如果是这样,仪器的可靠性将始终被低估。然后将个人之间的部分不确定性转移到测量仪器中。还必须通过更严格地选择问题,使用足够明确的指标以及区分清楚和不清楚的观点来处理不确定性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号