The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The impact of administration mode on response effects in survey measurement
Open accessAbstract
The major differences between face‐to‐face and telephone interviews as well as self‐administered questionnaires are reviewed and are related to the cognitive and communicative processes assumed to underlie the process of question answering. Based on these considerations the impact of administration mode on the emergence of well‐known response effects in survey measurement is discussed, and relevant experimental evidence is reported. It is concluded that administration mode affects the emergence of question order and context effects; the emergence of response order effects; the validity of retrospective reports; and the degree of socially desirable responding. The emergence of question wording and question form effects, on the other hand, appears to be relatively independent of administration mode.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
(1982) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477 · Cited by 8,240
Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method.
Babbie, E., & Dillman, D. A. (1982) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2068433 · Cited by 6,852
Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.
Shafer, G. R., Kahnerman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1984) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288362 · Cited by 5,657
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1 · Cited by 5,219
Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method.
Osmond, M. W., & Dillman, D. A. (1979) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2577403 · Cited by 5,023
Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change
Marquart, F., & Naderer, B. (2016) · Schlüsselwerke der Medienwirkungsforschung · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-09923-7_20 · Cited by 4,993
Judgment under uncertainty: List of contributors
Kahneman, D. J., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982) · Cited by 4,670
Judgment under uncertainty: Causality and attribution
Kahneman, D. J., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982) · Cited by 4,670
Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications
Anderson, J. R. (2014) · Cited by 4,121
Cited by
The Design and Administration of Mail Surveys
Dillman, D. A. (1991) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.so.17.080191.001301 · Cited by 1,311
Dillman, D. A., Phelps, G., Tortora, R., Swift, K., Kohrell, J., Berck, J., & Messer, B. L. (2009) · Social Science Research · doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2008.03.007 · Cited by 850
The diagnostic accuracy of the PTSD Checklist: A critical review
McDonald, S. D., & Calhoun, P. S. (2010) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2010.06.012 · Cited by 546
The Meaning of “Being Chinese” and “Being American”: Variation among Chinese American Young Adults
Tsai, J. L., Ying, Y.-W., & Lee, P. A. (2000) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/0022022100031003002 · Cited by 502
Gmel, G., & Rehm, J. (2004) · Contemporary Drug Problems · doi:10.1177/009145090403100304 · Cited by 466
Metadata
- Authors
- Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Hippler, H., & Bishop, G.
- Venue
- Applied Cognitive Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1991-05
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 193-212
- ISSN
- 0888-4080 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0720
- OpenAlex
- W2050266611
- Cited by
- 278
- References
- 69
- FWCI
- 18.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The impact of administration mode on response effects in survey measurement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/acp.2350050304
- The paper
- Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Hippler, H., & Bishop, G. (1991). The impact of administration mode on response effects in survey measurement. Applied Cognitive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350050304
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
