1 / 17

A comparison of World-Wide Web and paper-and-pencil personality questionnaires.

A comparison of World-Wide Web and paper-and-pencil personality questionnaires. Pettit, F. A. (2002). A comparison of World-Wide Web and paper-and-pencil personality questionnaires. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34 (1),50-54. 報告者：劉孟慈 報告日期： 2004.09.20. Outline.

krysta
Download Presentation

A comparison of World-Wide Web and paper-and-pencil personality questionnaires.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A comparison of World-Wide Web and paper-and-pencil personality questionnaires. Pettit, F. A. (2002). A comparison of World-Wide Web and paper-and-pencil personality questionnaires. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34(1),50-54. 報告者：劉孟慈 報告日期：2004.09.20

  2. Outline • 摘要 • 前言 • 文獻探討—respond sets • 實驗方法—對象、程序、工具、操作 • 結果 • 討論 • 結論

  3. 摘要 • 分析問卷的response sets，比較由WWW和PP (paper-and-pencil)所得到資料的品質，得到其品質一樣。且WWW有優於PP之處，故推斷WWW是一項很有潛力的問卷工具。

  4. 前言 • 動機： The quality of WWW data has not yet been examined. • 目的： To discover whether WWW data can adequately replicate PP data.

  5. 文獻探討—respond sets • One way to evaluate the quality of data is to examine response sets. • In questionnaires, response sets are patterns of responding that are independent of the questions. • Cronbach (1946) indicated that “because response sets permit persons with the same knowledge or attitude or ability to receive different scores, response sets always lower the logical validity of a test” (p. 484).

  6. 文獻探討—respond sets

  7. 實驗方法—對象

  8. Web site 歡迎畫面 觀看問卷 回應畫面 要求畫面 實驗方法—程序 招募參加者 隨機分配 住在US或Canada 是 否 E-mail Mail E-mail 問卷網站 回郵 問卷網站

  9. 實驗方法—工具

  10. 實驗方法—操作 • Random response : PWRRS的得分. • Response errors: 下列情況的題目總數。(1) two or more options were selected, (2) it was not obvious which option was finally selected, (3) the response was illegible, (4) the response was inappro­priate or impossible,(5) a demographic combination was unlikely. • Nonresponse: 未作答題目的總數。 • Extreme response: 選擇非常同意或非常不同意的題目總數。 • Acquiescent response: 選擇正向答案的題目總數。

  11. 結果

  12. 結果

  13. 結果

  14. 討論 • 從random responding, item nonresponse,extreme responding, acquiescent respond­ing四項來看，WWW和PP並沒有顯著差異。 • 從response error的結果來看，我們只能說WWW可以減少錯誤資料。

  15. 討論 • 研究限制 • WWW的參與者能否真實反應大眾化的意見 • 參與者是不是self-selected • 研究主題不同可能導致WWW和PP的資料造成顯著差異

  16. 結論 • WWW是一個做問卷研究好工具： • 節省紙張及郵票費用 • 排版美觀、可以美化版面 • 改正錯誤不須全部重來 • 招募參與者相當快速 • 收集資料相當快速 • 雖然透過WWW收集資料很快，但因為不可能限制任何人到任何網站，所以，為了找到年齡及成熟度符合研究所需的對象，實驗應放在某些特定的網站。

  17. 報告結束，謝謝大家~*

More Related