Validation of the mental visualization effect on answer selection in closed questions in surveys
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.34117/bjdv10n7-053Keywords:
mantal visualisation of item, psychometric test, pre-test, survey experimentation, item choiceAbstract
The selection of listed answers in surveys is influenced by numerous aspects. At the moment of decoding, the mental representation of the item can represent a bias if it is distorted by personal impressions. The present research aims to identify these influences at the moment of choice of items presented sequentially in a closed-ended question by a nominal scale. For this purpose, the answers of a survey were correlated with the results of psychometric experimental pretests on mental image formation by applying them to experimental groups. Although the item selection affects several aspects of linguistic elements, it seems that this no influences the choice. The comparison between the data of mental visualisation of item and item frequency showed a very high correlation unusually in social or psychosocial sciences. Wording can increase the item comprehensibility but not eliminate the visual imagery effects, therefore represents a permanent bias.
References
ALTARRIBA, J., & BAUER, L. M. (2004). The distinctiveness of emotion concepts: a comparison between emotion, abstract, and concrete words. The American Journal of Psychology, 117(3), 389-410. https://doi.org/10.2307/4149007
ANDREWS, F. M. (1984). Construct validity and error components of survey measures: a structural modeling approach. Public Opinion Quarterly, 48(2), 409-442. https://doi.org/10.1086/268840
AUER, S., HAMPEL, H., MÖLLER, H. J., & REISBERG, B. (2000). Cross-cultural and transnational issues. Translations of measurements and scales: opportunities and diversities. International Psychogeriatrics, 12, suppl. 1, 391-394. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104161020000733X
BINDER, K. S., & KEITH, R. (1999). Does contextual strength modulate the subordinate bias effect? A reply to Kellas and Vu. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6(3), 518-522. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210843
BISWAL, B. B., MENNES, M., ZUO, X. N., GOHEL, S., KELLY, C., SMITH, S. M., ... & MILHAM, M. P. (2010). Toward discovery science of human brain function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(10), 4734-4739. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0911855107
BLAIR, J., & SRINATH, K. P. (2008). A note on sample size for behavior coding pretests. Field Methods, 20(1), 85-95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X07303601
BOLTEN, R. N. (1993). Pretesting questionnaires: content analyses of respondents’ current verbal protocols. Marketing Science, 12(3), 280-303. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.12.3.280
BORENSTEIN, M., HEDGES, L. V., HIGGINS, J. P. T., & ROTHSTEIN, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester: Wiley. ISBN 9781119558354
BRANNIGAN, A., & ZWERMAN, W. (2001). The real ‘Hawthorne Effect’. Society, 38(2), 55-60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-001-1041-6
CARDOSO, I. (2006). Aspectos transculturais na adaptação de instrumentos de avaliação psicológica. Interações: Sociedade e as novas modernidades, 10, 98-112. https://www.interacoes-ismt.com/index.php/revista/article/view/178
CLARK, I. A., & MAGUIRE, E. A. (2020). Do questionnaires reflect their purported cognitive functions? Cognition, 195, 104-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104114
COOPER, H., HEDGES, L. V., & VALENTINE, J. C. (2019). The handbook of research syntheses and meta-analysis. New York: Sage. ISBN 9781610448864
COSTA, E. F. da, MOURÃO, A. R. B., MENDES, M. I. C., JESUS, M. S de., PINHEIRO, I. de L., MENEZES, R. O., & ALCÂNTARA, M. L. P. de (2020). Validação de uma problemática de pesquisa. Brazilian Journal of Development, 6(10), 80962–80978. https://doi.org/10.34117/bjdv6n10-499
CYR, J. (2019). An integrative approach to measurement: focus groups as a survey pretest. Quality & Quantity, 53, 897-913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0795-5
DIANA, R.A., REDER, L.M. (2005). The list strength effect: A contextual competition account. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1289-1302. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193229
DRUCKMAN, J. N., & KAM, C. D. (2011). Students as experimental participants. In J. N. DRUCKMAN, D. P. GREEN, J. H. KUKLINSKI, & A. LUPIA (Orgs.). Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science (v. 1, pp. 41-57). Cambridge: University Press.
ENGELKAMP, J. (1995). Visual imagery and enactment of actions in memory. British Journal of Psychology, 86(2), 227-240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1995.tb02558.x
FORSBERG, A., JOHNSON, W., & LOGIE, R. H. (2020). Cognitive aging and verbal labelling in continuous visual memory. Memory & Cognition, 48(7), 1196-1213. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-020-01043-3
HENKEL, K. (2022). Valores e cultura política de jovens eleitores. Belém: Universidade Federal do Pará
HEYMAN, T., BRUNINX, A., HUTCHISON, K. A., & STORMS, G. (2018). The (un) reliability of item-level semantic priming effects. Behavior Research Methods, 50(6), 2173-2183. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1040-9
LITTLE, T. D., CHANG, R., GORRALL, B. K., WAGGENSPACK, L., FUKUDA, E., ALLEN, P. J., NOAM, G. G. (2019). The retrospective pretest–posttest design redux: on its validity as an alternative to traditional pretest–posttest measurement. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 44(2), 175-183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025419877973
LOGIE, R. H., ZUCCO, G. M., & BADDELEY, A. D. (1990). Interference with visual short-term memory. Acta psychologica, 75(1), 55-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(90)90066-O
LOPES, C. A. G. (2006). A repetição na língua portuguesa. Revista Philologus, 12(36), 33-53.
MCAVINUE, L. P., & ROBERTSON, I. H. (2008). Measuring motor imagery ability: a review. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 20(2), 232-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440701394624
NOVEMBRE, G., & IANNETTI, G. D. (2021). Hyperscanning alone cannot prove causality. Multibrain stimulation can. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(2), 96-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.11.0
OLIVEIRA, L., FIGUEIREDO, P. S., LOIOLA, E., & PEREIRA-GUIZZO, C. (2020). An exploratory study on the presence of cognitive biases in project management decisions at a research institute. Brazilian Journal of Development, 6(9), 68693-68707. https://doi.org/10.34117/bjdv6n9-349
PERNEGER, T. V., COURVOISIER, D. S., HUDELSON, P. M., & GAYET-AGERON, A. (2015). Sample size for pre-tests of questionnaires. Quality of Life Research, 24(1), 147-151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0752-2
RICKHEIT, G., HERRMANN, T., & DEUTSCH, W. (2008). Psycholinguistik. Psycholinguistics: an international handbook. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110114249
ROBIN, F., & GARNIER, C. (2022). False memories of scripted actions: comparison between enactment and imagery encoding (No. 8420). EasyChair. https://doi.org/10.36315/2022inpact108
ROCHE, J., TOLAN, G. A., & TEHAN, G. (2011). Concreteness effects in short-term memory: A test of the item-order hypothesis. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(4), 245-253. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024693
ROHRMANN, B. (2007). Verbal qualifiers for rating scales: sociolinguistic considerations and psychometric data. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.
TAHERDOOST, H. (2016). Validity and reliability of the research instrument; how to test the validation of a questionnaire/1 we know our own conscious experience? The case of visual imagery. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 9(5-6), 35-53. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:18131115
SUTIN, A. R.; ROBINS, R. W. (2007). Phenomenology of autobiographical memories: the memory experiences questionnaire. Memory, 15(4), 390-411. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210701256654
THAPAR, A., & ROUDER, J. N. (2001). Bias in conceptual priming. Psychonomic bulletin & Review, 8(4), 791-797. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196219
VIEIRA, C. B. B. (2019). A influência de informações temáticas na previsão de argumentos verbais. PhD Dissertation, University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte. http://hdl.handle.net/1843/30995
VISSER, P. S.; KROSNICK, J. A.; LAVRAKAS, P. J. (2000). Survey research. In: Harry Reis & Charles Judd, (Eds.). Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology. (pp. 223-252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
VUL, E., HARRIS, C., WINKIELMAN, P., & PASHLER, H. (2009). Puzzlingly high correlations in fMRI studies of emotion, personality, and social cognition. Perspectives on psychological science, 4(3), 274-290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01125.x
WILHOLT, T. (2009). Bias and values in scientific research. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Part A, 40(1), 92-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2008.12.005
WOISETSCHLÄGER, D., ESCHWEILER, M., & EVANSCHITZKY, H. (2007). Ein Leitfaden zur Anwendung varianzanalytisch ausgerichteter Laborexperimente. Wirtschaftwissenschaftliches Studium, 36(12), 546-554. https://doi.org/10.15358/0340-1650-2007-12-546
ZIMMERMAN, D. W., & WILLIAMS, R. H. (1977). The theory of test validity and correlated errors of measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 16(2), 135-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90063-3
