Acquiescence response set
DESCRIPTION
A form of bias involving a consistent individual tendency to agree with statements such as attitude statements regardless of the content or to consistently answer yes/no questions either in the affirmative (yes) or in the negative (no) irrespective of a question’s content.
A form of bias involving a consistent individual tendency to agree with statements such as attitude statements regardless of the content or to consistently answer yes/no questions either in the affirmative (yes) or in the negative (no) irrespective of a question’s content.
KEY INSIGHTS
Research on acquiescence response set as a form of bias finds the tendency varies in prevalence in responses to questionnaires and surveys (where, for example, cross-cultural differences in its prevalence are clearly observed). Nevertheless, the potential for its occurrence (with similarly worded questions in particular) is of sufficient concern to experienced researchers including survey researchers and developers of question or statement-based scales and that methods for controlling for and/or compensating for the bias are typically implemented with the aim of obtaining more meaningful responses.
Research on acquiescence response set as a form of bias finds the tendency varies in prevalence in responses to questionnaires and surveys (where, for example, cross-cultural differences in its prevalence are clearly observed). Nevertheless, the potential for its occurrence (with similarly worded questions in particular) is of sufficient concern to experienced researchers including survey researchers and developers of question or statement-based scales and that methods for controlling for and/or compensating for the bias are typically implemented with the aim of obtaining more meaningful responses.
KEYWORDS Bias, questionnaires, surveys, scale development
IMPLICATIONS
When acquiescence response set as a form of bias is a potential concern in survey research or in scale development, a common approach for attempting to control or compensate for it when providing multiple statements or asking multiple questions is to have some statements or questions positively worded and others negatively worded in a sense that the two types of questions are far more opposite than similar. In doing so, responding in agreement to all or in responding with a consistent affirmative or negative answer to all would be found to be contradictory and, as such, would require respondents to potentially engage more fully with the statements or questions given.
When acquiescence response set as a form of bias is a potential concern in survey research or in scale development, a common approach for attempting to control or compensate for it when providing multiple statements or asking multiple questions is to have some statements or questions positively worded and others negatively worded in a sense that the two types of questions are far more opposite than similar. In doing so, responding in agreement to all or in responding with a consistent affirmative or negative answer to all would be found to be contradictory and, as such, would require respondents to potentially engage more fully with the statements or questions given.
APPLICATION AREAS AND FURTHER READINGS
Marketing Research
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., and Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). ‘Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies,’ Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., and Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). ‘Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies,’ Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
International Marketing
Baumgartner, Hans, and Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E. M. (2001). ‘Response Styles in Marketing Research: A Cross-National Investigation,’ Journal of Marketing Research, 38, May, 143–156.
Malhotra, Naresh K., Agarwal, James, and Peterson, Mark (1996). ‘Methodological Issues in Cross-Cultural Research: A State of the Art Review,’ International Marketing Review, 13(5), 7–43.
Baumgartner, Hans, and Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E. M. (2001). ‘Response Styles in Marketing Research: A Cross-National Investigation,’ Journal of Marketing Research, 38, May, 143–156.
Malhotra, Naresh K., Agarwal, James, and Peterson, Mark (1996). ‘Methodological Issues in Cross-Cultural Research: A State of the Art Review,’ International Marketing Review, 13(5), 7–43.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Winkler, J. D., Kanouse, D. E., and Ware, J. E., Jr. (1982). ‘Controlling for Acquiescence
Response Set in Scale Development,’ Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 555–561.
Winkler, J. D., Kanouse, D. E., and Ware, J. E., Jr. (1982). ‘Controlling for Acquiescence
Response Set in Scale Development,’ Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 555–561.
action see buyer influence/readiness
actionability see segmentation viability
actionability see segmentation viability