File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)

Article: The How of Survey Self-report: VAS-Likert-Slide-Swipe... Same difference?

TitleThe How of Survey Self-report: VAS-Likert-Slide-Swipe... Same difference?
The Future of Survey Self-report: An experiment contrasting Likert, VAS, Slide, and Swipe touch interfaces
Authors
KeywordsLikert
VAS
Slide
Self-report
Response format
Issue Date2020
PublisherEuropean Association for Research on Learning and Instruction. The Journal's web site is located at http://journals.sfu.ca/flr/index.php/journal
Citation
Frontline Learning Research, 2020, v. 8 n. 3, p. 10-25 How to Cite?
AbstractSelf-report is a fundamental research tool for the social sciences. Despite quantitative surveys being the workhorses of the self-report stable, few researchers question their format—often blindly using some form of Labelled Categorical Scale (Likert-type). This study presents a brief review of the current literature examining the efficacy of survey formats, addressing longstanding paper-based concerns and more recent issues raised by computer-and mobile-based surveys. An experiment comparing four survey formats on touch-based devices was conducted. Differences in means, predictive validity, time to complete and centrality were compared. A range of preliminary findings emphasise the similarities and striking differences between these self-report formats. Key conclusions include: A) that the two continuous interfaces (Slide & Swipe) yieldedthe most robust data for predictive modelling; B) that future research with touch self-report interfaces can set aside the VAS format; C) that researchers seeking to improve on Likert-type formats need to focus on user interfaces that are quick/simple to use. Implications and future directions for research in this area are discussed.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/282267
ISSN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFryer, LK-
dc.contributor.authorNakao, K-
dc.date.accessioned2020-05-05T14:32:55Z-
dc.date.available2020-05-05T14:32:55Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationFrontline Learning Research, 2020, v. 8 n. 3, p. 10-25-
dc.identifier.issn2295-3159-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/282267-
dc.description.abstractSelf-report is a fundamental research tool for the social sciences. Despite quantitative surveys being the workhorses of the self-report stable, few researchers question their format—often blindly using some form of Labelled Categorical Scale (Likert-type). This study presents a brief review of the current literature examining the efficacy of survey formats, addressing longstanding paper-based concerns and more recent issues raised by computer-and mobile-based surveys. An experiment comparing four survey formats on touch-based devices was conducted. Differences in means, predictive validity, time to complete and centrality were compared. A range of preliminary findings emphasise the similarities and striking differences between these self-report formats. Key conclusions include: A) that the two continuous interfaces (Slide & Swipe) yieldedthe most robust data for predictive modelling; B) that future research with touch self-report interfaces can set aside the VAS format; C) that researchers seeking to improve on Likert-type formats need to focus on user interfaces that are quick/simple to use. Implications and future directions for research in this area are discussed.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherEuropean Association for Research on Learning and Instruction. The Journal's web site is located at http://journals.sfu.ca/flr/index.php/journal-
dc.relation.ispartofFrontline Learning Research-
dc.subjectLikert-
dc.subjectVAS-
dc.subjectSlide-
dc.subjectSelf-report-
dc.subjectResponse format-
dc.titleThe How of Survey Self-report: VAS-Likert-Slide-Swipe... Same difference?-
dc.titleThe Future of Survey Self-report: An experiment contrasting Likert, VAS, Slide, and Swipe touch interfaces-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailFryer, LK: fryer@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityFryer, LK=rp02148-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.doi10.14786/flr.v8i3.501-
dc.identifier.hkuros309767-
dc.identifier.volume8-
dc.identifier.issue3-
dc.identifier.spage10-
dc.identifier.epage25-
dc.publisher.placeBelgium-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats