What Can We Learn From Open Questions in Surveys? A Case Study on Non-Voting Reported in the 2013 German Longitudinal Election Study
Open survey questions are often used to evaluate closed questions. However, they can fulfil this function only if there is a strong link between answers to open questions and answers to related closed questions. Using reasons for non-voting reported in the German Longitudinal Election Study 2013, we...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
PsychOpen GOLD/ Leibniz Institute for Psychology
2020-04-01
|
| Series: | Methodology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://meth.psychopen.eu/index.php/meth/article/view/2801 |
| _version_ | 1797967407325642752 |
|---|---|
| author | Henning Silber Cornelia Zuell Steffen-M. Kuehnel |
| author_facet | Henning Silber Cornelia Zuell Steffen-M. Kuehnel |
| author_sort | Henning Silber |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Open survey questions are often used to evaluate closed questions. However, they can fulfil this function only if there is a strong link between answers to open questions and answers to related closed questions. Using reasons for non-voting reported in the German Longitudinal Election Study 2013, we investigated this link by examining whether the reported reasons for non-voting may be substantive reasons or ex-post legitimations. We tested five theoretically derived hypotheses about respondents who gave, or did not give, a specific reason. Results showed that (a) answers to open questions were indeed related to answers to closed questions and could be used in explanatory turnout models to predict voting behavior, and (b) the relationship between answers to open and closed questions and the predictive power of reasons given in response to the open questions were stronger in the post-election survey (reported behavior) than in the pre-election survey (intended behavior). |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T02:29:39Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e8966626c8ea4b188b03b46f4faa922a |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1614-2241 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T02:29:39Z |
| publishDate | 2020-04-01 |
| publisher | PsychOpen GOLD/ Leibniz Institute for Psychology |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Methodology |
| spelling | doaj.art-e8966626c8ea4b188b03b46f4faa922a2023-01-02T21:44:32ZengPsychOpen GOLD/ Leibniz Institute for PsychologyMethodology1614-22412020-04-01161415810.5964/meth.2801meth.2801What Can We Learn From Open Questions in Surveys? A Case Study on Non-Voting Reported in the 2013 German Longitudinal Election StudyHenning Silber0Cornelia Zuell1Steffen-M. Kuehnel2Department of Survey Design and Methodology, GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Mannheim, GermanyDepartment of Survey Design and Methodology, GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Mannheim, GermanyCenter of Methods in Social Sciences (MZS), University of Göttingen, Göttingen, GermanyOpen survey questions are often used to evaluate closed questions. However, they can fulfil this function only if there is a strong link between answers to open questions and answers to related closed questions. Using reasons for non-voting reported in the German Longitudinal Election Study 2013, we investigated this link by examining whether the reported reasons for non-voting may be substantive reasons or ex-post legitimations. We tested five theoretically derived hypotheses about respondents who gave, or did not give, a specific reason. Results showed that (a) answers to open questions were indeed related to answers to closed questions and could be used in explanatory turnout models to predict voting behavior, and (b) the relationship between answers to open and closed questions and the predictive power of reasons given in response to the open questions were stronger in the post-election survey (reported behavior) than in the pre-election survey (intended behavior).https://meth.psychopen.eu/index.php/meth/article/view/2801open questionsdata qualityelectionnon-votingrandom imputation |
| spellingShingle | Henning Silber Cornelia Zuell Steffen-M. Kuehnel What Can We Learn From Open Questions in Surveys? A Case Study on Non-Voting Reported in the 2013 German Longitudinal Election Study Methodology open questions data quality election non-voting random imputation |
| title | What Can We Learn From Open Questions in Surveys? A Case Study on Non-Voting Reported in the 2013 German Longitudinal Election Study |
| title_full | What Can We Learn From Open Questions in Surveys? A Case Study on Non-Voting Reported in the 2013 German Longitudinal Election Study |
| title_fullStr | What Can We Learn From Open Questions in Surveys? A Case Study on Non-Voting Reported in the 2013 German Longitudinal Election Study |
| title_full_unstemmed | What Can We Learn From Open Questions in Surveys? A Case Study on Non-Voting Reported in the 2013 German Longitudinal Election Study |
| title_short | What Can We Learn From Open Questions in Surveys? A Case Study on Non-Voting Reported in the 2013 German Longitudinal Election Study |
| title_sort | what can we learn from open questions in surveys a case study on non voting reported in the 2013 german longitudinal election study |
| topic | open questions data quality election non-voting random imputation |
| url | https://meth.psychopen.eu/index.php/meth/article/view/2801 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT henningsilber whatcanwelearnfromopenquestionsinsurveysacasestudyonnonvotingreportedinthe2013germanlongitudinalelectionstudy AT corneliazuell whatcanwelearnfromopenquestionsinsurveysacasestudyonnonvotingreportedinthe2013germanlongitudinalelectionstudy AT steffenmkuehnel whatcanwelearnfromopenquestionsinsurveysacasestudyonnonvotingreportedinthe2013germanlongitudinalelectionstudy |