The questionnaire as a whole and each question separately are special kind of tools intended to relieve certain social information or measurement of any social process. And the thinner the tool, the more reliable it is, the more accurate information we get, the better our knowledge. Why so many long and sociologists on methods and techniques of research to carefully formulate each question, conduct the pilot study, develop the dozens of rules of how and how not to formulate questions and to build the questionnaire as a whole. No one raises objections to the fact that a questionnaire should be built on rules. But what is a properly constructed questionnaire. This question is not always a right answer. Paradoxically sounds, but the fact that even built according to the rules application can give wrong information. I mean in this case, those sorts of errors that can be tolerated at different stages of development of a technique and which lead to a shift in the survey results. We are talking about something else. We are talking about, and this must be stressed as a key methodological requirement for the construction of a questionnaire and each question that the rules themselves are not the key to obtaining reliable information. Rules themselves are meaningless and gain meaning only in the context of certain objectives of the study. And the fact that in some cases impossible, in others is not only possible but even necessary. Some sociologists absolyutiziruyut rules, we approach them as canons, dogmas, as meaningful in itself. They emphatically require to strictly follow the rules of building questionnaires and formulating questions, as if in itself, the application of the rules leads to obtain reliable information. But it must be remembered that applying a rule, we always have some information, though not necessarily one that meets our goals and objectives. Rules are valuable in themselves, but as a tool for solving specific tasks, obtain the necessary information. So, examining the group of respondents, negative-minded on the studied event, the phenomenon, the sociologist can construct a question in such a way that it will have a clearly positive direction. All the rules for constructing the questionnaire is strictly forbidden to do it. But what is it? In this case, perhaps it is necessary in order to identify therefore how high the degree of negative attitude to the studied phenomenon. Or in the case of positive mood, can be caused by the influence of public opinion, conventional standards, the researcher can provoke the Respondent to negative answers, and thereby identify the stability of its positive reaction. It's one thing to respond positively or negatively to a direct question, the other to fight for their opinions, to actively resist the obvious pressure of the researcher. For example, identifying the stability of the installation of respondents on attitude to a certain brand of refrigerator, you can ask a question, built against all the rules. Almost explicitly, describing the advantages of this refrigerator, to exert pressure on the Respondent to give him to understand that it is not only the opinion of the researcher, but also a wide range of people.
1 comment:
The questionnaire as a whole and each question separately are special kind of tools intended
to relieve certain social information or measurement of any social process. And the thinner the tool, the more reliable it is, the more accurate information we get, the better our knowledge. Why so many long and sociologists on methods and techniques of research to carefully formulate each question, conduct the pilot study, develop the dozens of rules of how and how not to formulate questions and to build the questionnaire as a whole.
No one raises objections to the fact that a questionnaire should be built on rules. But what is a properly constructed questionnaire. This question is not always a right answer. Paradoxically sounds, but the fact that even built according to the rules application can give wrong information. I mean in this case, those sorts of errors that can be tolerated at different stages of development of a technique and which lead to a shift in the survey results. We are talking about something else. We are talking about, and this must be stressed as a key methodological requirement for the construction of a questionnaire and each question that the rules themselves are not the key to obtaining reliable information. Rules themselves are meaningless and gain meaning only in the context of certain objectives of the study. And the fact that in some cases impossible, in others is not only possible but even necessary.
Some sociologists absolyutiziruyut rules, we approach them as canons, dogmas, as meaningful in itself. They emphatically require to strictly follow the rules of building questionnaires and formulating questions, as if in itself, the application of the rules leads to obtain reliable information. But it must be remembered that applying a rule, we always have some information, though not necessarily one that meets our goals and objectives. Rules are valuable in themselves, but as a tool for solving specific tasks, obtain the necessary information.
So, examining the group of respondents, negative-minded on the studied event, the phenomenon, the sociologist can construct a question in such a way that it will have a clearly positive direction. All the rules for constructing the questionnaire is strictly forbidden to do it. But what is it? In this case, perhaps it is necessary in order to identify therefore how high the degree of negative attitude to the studied phenomenon.
Or in the case of positive mood, can be caused by the influence of public opinion, conventional standards, the researcher can provoke the Respondent to negative answers, and thereby identify the stability of its positive reaction. It's one thing to respond positively or negatively to a direct question, the other to fight for their opinions, to actively resist the obvious pressure of the researcher.
For example, identifying the stability of the installation of respondents on attitude to a certain brand of refrigerator, you can ask a question, built against all the rules. Almost explicitly, describing the advantages of this refrigerator, to exert pressure on the Respondent to give him to understand that it is not only the opinion of the researcher, but also a wide range of people.
Post a Comment