The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Evaluation of a Cognitive Theory of Response-Order Effects in Survey Measurement
Abstract
Previous research has documented effects of the order in which response choices are offered to respondents using closed-ended survey items, but no theory of the psychological sources of these effects has yet been proposed. This paper offers such a theory drawn from a variety of psychological research. Using data from a split-ballot experiment in the 1984 General Social Survey involving a variant of Kohn's parental values measure, we test some predictions made by the theory about what kind of response order effect would be expected (a primacy effect) and among which respondents it should be strongest (those low in cognitive sophistication). These predictions are confirmed. We also test the “form-resistant correlation” hypothesis. Although correlations between items are altered by changes m response order, the presence and nature of the latent value dimension underlying these responses is essentially unaffected.
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
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 19,023
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 18,497
Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing
Klayman, J., & Ha, Y.-W. (1987) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.94.2.211 · Cited by 2,094
Analysis of rehearsal processes in free recall.
Rundus, D. (1971) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0031185 · Cited by 797
Cited by
Common Method Bias in Marketing: Causes, Mechanisms, and Procedural Remedies
MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012) · Journal of Retailing · doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2012.08.001 · Cited by 3,051
Krosnick, J. A. (1999) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.537 · Cited by 1,852
Self-citationPretesting survey instruments: An overview of cognitive methods
Collins, D. (2003) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1023/a:1023254226592 · Cited by 1,506
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
Tourangeau, R., & Smith, T. W. (1996) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/297751 · Cited by 1,295
Metadata
- Authors
- Krosnick, J. A., & Alwin, D. F.
- Venue
- Public Opinion Quarterly
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1987
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 201
- ISSN
- 0033-362X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2112665044
- Cited by
- 825
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 22.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: An Evaluation of a Cognitive Theory of Response-Order Effects in Survey Measurement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/269029
- The paper
- Krosnick, J. A., & Alwin, D. F. (1987). An Evaluation of a Cognitive Theory of Response-Order Effects in Survey Measurement. Public Opinion Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1086/269029
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.
