<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>The split-ballot multitrait-multimethod (SB-MTMM) approach has been used to evaluate the measurement quality of questions in survey research. It aims to reduce the response burden of the classic MTMM design, which requires repeating alternative formulations of a survey measure to the same respondent at least three times, by using combinations of two methods in multiple groups. The SB-MTMM approach has been applied to the European Social Survey (ESS) to examine the quality of questions across countries, including the differences in response design and measurement errors. Despite wide application of the SB-MTMM design in Europe, it is yet unknown whether the same quality of survey instruments can be achieved in both a different cultural context and in a logographic writing system, like the one in Taiwan.</p><p>This study tests for measurement invariance and compares measurement quality in Taiwan and Denmark, by estimating the reliability and validity of different response scales using the SB-MTMM approach. By using the same questions as in the ESS, a cross-cultural comparison is made, in order to understand whether the studied response scales perform equally well in Taiwan, compared to a European country. Results show that quality estimates are comparable across countries.</p></abstract>

The split-ballot multitrait-multimethod (SB-MTMM) approach has been used to evaluate the measurement quality of questions in survey research. It aims to reduce the response burden of the classic MTMM design, which requires repeating alternative formulations of a survey measure to the same respondent at least three times, by using combinations of two methods in multiple groups. The SB-MTMM approach has been applied to the European Social Survey (ESS) to examine the quality of questions across countries, including the differences in response design and measurement errors. Despite wide application of the SB-MTMM design in Europe, it is yet unknown whether the same quality of survey instruments can be achieved in both a different cultural context and in a logographic writing system, like the one in Taiwan.This study tests for measurement invariance and compares measurement quality in Taiwan and Denmark, by estimating the reliability and validity of different response scales using the SB-MTMM approach. By using the same questions as in the ESS, a cross-cultural comparison is made, in order to understand whether the studied response scales perform equally well in Taiwan, compared to a European country. Results show that quality estimates are comparable across countries.

Cross-National Comparison of Equivalence and Measurement Quality of Response Scales in Denmark and Taiwan

Journal of Official Statistics

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

The split-ballot multitrait-multimethod (SB-MTMM) approach has been used to evaluate the measurement quality of questions in survey research. It aims to reduce...

Cross-National Comparison of Equivalence and Measurement Quality of Response Scales in Denmark and Taiwan

Online veröffentlicht: 26. März 2019

Seitenbereich: 117 - 135

Eingereicht: 01. Okt. 2016

Akzeptiert: 01. Juli 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2019-0006

Schlüsselwörter
Split-ballot MTMM, reliability, validity, question quality

© 2019 Pei-shan Liao et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Cross-National Comparison of Equivalence and Measurement Quality of Response Scales in Denmark and Taiwan

Online veröffentlicht: 26. März 2019

Seitenbereich: 117 - 135

Eingereicht: 01. Okt. 2016

Akzeptiert: 01. Juli 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2019-0006

SchlüsselwörterSplit-ballot MTMM, reliability, validity, question quality

© 2019 Pei-shan Liao et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Schlüsselwörter
Split-ballot MTMM, reliability, validity, question quality