2.  a.k.a. “paper-pencil” measures or “self- report” measures  represents the dominant paradigm for social science research in the last 30 years  advantages:  expedience in gathering data  yields interval level data  Disadvantages  People may not know their own minds  People may misreport information

3.  problems:  problem of “mindfulness,” verbal reports of mental processes are suspect  problem of “non-attitudes,” people tend to venture an opinion whether they have one or not  unreliability of self-reports data: even factual information can be misreported

4.  intentional misreporting of information.  social desirability bias  Providing socially correct responses  reasons for non-disclosure  embarrassment  fear of negative sanctions  shame, public humiliation  privacy  sometimes helpful to include a “lie scale”

5.  phrasing of questions is critical  avoid vague, nebulous questions  Bad example: “What do you think about abortion?”  Bad example: “How many children do you have?”  questions must be clear, unambiguous  Good example: “Which of the following statements best represents your attitude toward elective abortions in the first trimester?”  Conduct a “readability analysis”  avoid lengthy questions; keep questions short, succinct  Bad example: If she runs for president in 2016 and wins Hillary Clinton would become the first female President of the United States. Do you think her gender would be a problem in negotiating with the Arab world, which is a male- dominated culture?  Good example: Would Hillary Clinton make a good Supreme Court justice?

6.  avoid double-barreled questions (compound questions)  Bad example: “Do you favor stricter hand gun controls and mandatory minimum sentences for carjackers?”  avoid loaded language (push polling)  Bad example: “Don’t you think that...?” “Isn’t it true that...?”  Bad example: Emotionally charged words: “ gang member,” “welfare mother,” “extremist groups,” “spin doctor,” etc.  avoid slang, jargon, abbreviations and acronyms  Bad example: “Should states regulate PETA and the ALF?”  Bad example: “Do you think hip hop is whack?”  avoid or minimize negative wording  Bad example: Do you disagree with Romney’s decision not to disclose which tax loopholes he would close?  Good example: Should Romney disclose the specific tax loopholes he would close?

7.  Schuman, Ludwig, & Krosnick (1986): 60% of respondents selected one of four options in a close-ended format, but only 2.4% mentioned any of the same four responses in an open- ended format.  open-ended: allows subjects more leeway, flexibility  “What is your primary ethnic/cultural background?”  requires a content analysis of responses  close-ended or “forced-choice” ties respondents’ hands somewhat  easy to code the data  always include an “other_____________” category

8.  even slight variations in wording can alter respondents’ answers.  “occupied territory” versus “contested territory”  “assisted suicide” versus “mercy killing”  “fetus” versus “unborn child”  make questions concrete, come down the “ladder of abstraction”  Use negatively worded questions or statements sparingly  sometimes necessary to include reverse- valenced items to identify a “response set”

9.  Avoid evaluative language  Phrasing of questions should not imply approval, disapproval  Follow-ups should not suggest surprise, liking, disliking, etc. Bad example: Do you think the House of Representatives, which is dominated by the Tea Party, should lift the harsh restrictions on stem cell research? Bad example: Despite its poor track record in crisis intervention, do you think the United Nations should intervene in Sudan?

10.  Respondents must be capable and willing to answer the questions  May be unaware of topic/issue  May be unwilling to disclose  May lie, exaggerate, under-report or over-report  example: If you ask people what nonverbal cues they leak when they lie, people may not know.  example: if you ask people what they would do in a hostage crisis, how would they know?

11.  order effects: sequencing of questions can be a factor  “halo effect”: carry-over from one item to the next  use multiple versions of questionnaire  “response set”: checking the same response all the way down a questionnaire  use “reverse scaling” to detect this

12.  gender of researcher/respondent can influence responses  ethnicity of researcher/respondent can influence responses  medium can influence responses  face-to-face interview, telephone survey, mail survey, online survey  anonymous versus non-anonymous questionnaire  fatigue: minimize length of surveys

13. Type of survey Obtaining sample Cooperation rate Cost per respondent advantagesdisadvantages in persondifficultmediumhighinterviewer rapport, nonverbal cues respondent apprehension, expensive, time consuming telephoneeasyhighmediumfast, random sample (random dialers) call screening, limited to oral questions mall intercept easymediummedium to high fast, in- person can be costly, non-random sample maileasylowmediumrespondents aren’t rushed, random sample costly, low return rate Online or computer- assisted easyhighlowautomatic data entry requires computer literacy, non- random sample