CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 214Survey Methodology and NonresponsePsychometric Methodologies and TestingHealth Education and Validation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.

Cognitive psychology and self-reports: Models and methods

Jobe, Jared B.·2003·Quality of Life Research
DOI 10.1023/a:1023279029852
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article describes the models and methods that cognitive psychologists and survey researchers use to evaluate and experimentally test cognitive issues in questionnaire design and subsequently improve self-report instruments. These models and methods assess the cognitive processes underlying how respondents comprehend and generate answers to self-report questions. Cognitive processing models are briefly described. Non-experimental methods--expert cognitive review, cognitive task analysis, focus groups, and cognitive interviews--are described. Examples are provided of how these methods were effectively used to identify cognitive self-report issues. Experimental methods--cognitive laboratory experiments, field tests, and experiments embedded in field surveys--are described. Examples are provided of: (a) how laboratory experiments were designed to test the capability and accuracy of respondents in performing the cognitive tasks required to answer self-report questions, (b) how a field experiment was conducted in which a cognitively designed questionnaire was effectively tested against the original questionnaire, and (c) how a cognitive experiment embedded in a field survey was conducted to test cognitive predictions.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1023279029852

Cites

32 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 34 references

1 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Rubin DC (ed). Autobiographical Memory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
  2. Jobe JB, Herrmann DJ. Implications of models of survey cognition for memory theory. In: Herrmann D, Johnson M, McEvoy C, Hertzog C, Hertel P (eds), Basic and Applied Memory Research: Vol. 2. Practical Applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1996; 193–205.
  3. Tourangeau R. Cognitive sciences and survey methods. In: Jabine TB, Straf ML, Tanur JM, Tourangeau R (eds), Cognitive Aspects of Survey Methodology: Building a Bridge between Disciplines. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1984; 73–101.
  4. Esposito JL, Jobe JB. A general model of the survey interaction process. Bureau of the Census Seventh Annual Research Conference Proceedings 1991; 537–560.
  5. Pratt WF, Tourangeau R, Jobe JB, et al. Asking sensitive questions in a health survey. Vital Health Stat 6 (in press).
  6. Sudman S, Warnecke R, Johnson T, et al. Cognitive aspects of reporting cancer prevention examinations and tests. Vital Health Stat 6. 1994; 7: 1–171.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–214 of 214

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Jobe, J. B.
Affiliations
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Jobe, Jared B.
Venue
Quality of Life Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2003-05
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
219-227
ISSN
  • 0962-9343 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2649
DOI
10.1023/a:1023279029852
OpenAlex
W2135041929
Cited by
214
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 11
FWCI
13.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Quality of Life Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
self-report questionnaire, cognitive processing models, questionnaire design, cognitive interviewing, cognitive task analysis, focus groups, field experiments, respondent comprehension
MeSH terms
Attitude to Health, Cognition, Health Surveys, Humans, Models, Psychological, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Research Design, Self-Assessment, Sickness Impact Profile

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