Research Questionnaire

[cathryn]

Hi All,
With the permission of Laura I am posting a link to an online research questionnaire which is for the final part of a psychology bachelors degree. (6 weeks to go). I hope some of you will be able to find the time to complete it.

http://www.uclan-psych-cathryn.co.uk/questionnaire.htm

Laura was concerned that the unusual nature of the group and the Work we are all doing may skew the data. This is very possible, so I think that the best way to approach this is for the answers you give to be what would be pretty normal responses for you, i.e. before you were doing the Work, or had gone back to sleep momentarily. The questionnaire is completely anon, there is no way to identify individuals, so its a good opportunity to identify some of those little i's :o)

The study is relevant to the Work, and I hope you will find it interesting particularly the childhood memories part which for some is a completely blank area, the questions may help to prompt memories and enable a better understanding of that time as it relates to now.
Thanks
Cathryn

 

[rs]

The questionnaire assumes you have two parents and also brothers and/or sisters. Neither are guaranteed.

The other thread I noticed in the questions (where many of them revolve around the idea of perceived differential behavior) is that parents *could* have given you "blah" but chose not to. Two examples come to mind. First presume a relative poverty where material things were not forthcoming because there was no money to buy them. Second, presume a vast difference in health state between two children that seriously stresses the environment. Parents in this situation might be simply forced by circumstances to make choices that they would not prefer (e.g. where to spend money or where to invest time). An adult might be able to understand, a child simply sees the fact that their sister is getting all of the attention (without regard as to whether or not this is somehow justified). As you are investigating however, the psychological slant is formed by the child's point of view and not the adult.

 

[cathryn]

Hi rs
You are absolutely right on the details you mention. The main problem with any research questionnaire is that never are all the details and individual differences covered, the analysis and interpretation of results would become huge and confusing.
We have to take bites at it, then when a hypothesis is supported take it a stage further by moving into the areas you mention, see if they change the results significantly.

On the memories of childhood questionnaire, the choice of Mother and Father could just as easily be read as the major carers as is suggested in the intro, which may even be brothers and sisters. The socioeconomics and health are again a confounding variable but the effects they have remain the same I think, and a persons recollection of their upbringing is what we are measuring, how they see it now.

Trouble with psych research is that there are no absolutes unlike math and other exact sciences; nothing is ever proven in psychology, only predictions and theories supported, or not, as the case may be. The way I fill out these type of forms is to be a bit flexible, and for instance in a question that doesn't really apply to me I will select the nearest most appropriate answer as a compromise. Then there is often a middle ground answer which is sort of neutral.

Thanks rs for making me think about those issues, good stuff.
C

 

[CarpeDiem]

Cathryn, i understood that you are the author o questionnaire. As you state the purpose o questionnaire is to

find it interesting particularly the childhood memories part which for some is a completely blank area, the questions may help to prompt memories and enable a better understanding of that time as it relates to now

and

Research has shown that early childhood experiences with parents and major carers, may affect the way that we grow through various critical stages as we mature. This path from childhood to adulthood and onwards is different for everyone, and can sometimes be fraught with difficulty; this research examines how early development may affect the way people respond to conflict in close personal relationships

with recent events i may be very off track, but it struck me that the purpose of this questionnaire may well be not as it's pesented, or at least
a dual one. See, your questionnaire has a consistent focus (or so i see it) on self-contradictory behavior of those who are responding, in all sets of questions a clear pattern of series of questions where the same statement is given in positive and then in negative is evident.
So, i individual is answering 'yes' to something like 'I have experienced feelings of love with someone outside of my family' and then answer
yes again to 'I don’t think I have really loved anyone outside of my family' individual isn't consistent with answers.
Your questionnaire is really packed up to the bottleneck with contradicting statements like that one.
Is that questionnaire more like a bs-meter?

 

[rs]

Is that questionnaire more like a bs-meter?

I think this is "standard" psychological test design. If you ask the same question twice in two different ways and get the same answer, the answer is reliable. If you get different answers, then the answer is unreliable.

People do not always answer test questions truthfully, either in a deliberate attempt to lie or in a sort of deep denial self-protection mechanism way. The test questions are not necessarily designed to get to the truth (which may be impossible) but instead to only gage the relative reliability of the answers.

 

[cathryn]

Hi CarpDiem
There are a few characteristics of a good questionniare which over time provide consistent results, they are reliability & validity particularly. That the answers can be reliably and consistently repeated with similar results, even with the same set of people at a later date; and that the questionnaire is actually measuring what it is supposed to be measuring. As rs pointed out, if a participant answers yes to both the examples you gave, then the reliability of that participant is in question, not the questionnaire. In extreme or obvious cases, where other things are taken into account, data is removed from the study where response sets have been entered eg checking all the same numbers or sets of numbers called 'yes sets' or 'please the researcher' or any number of clearly obvious deceptions. It's sad in these cases because the researchers are almost always trying to learn something, and it's no fun having to delete a set of data, however, a certain number of questions are scored in the reverse order to prevent response sets and therefore they stand out at the analysis stage - standard questionnaire proceadure.

I can not claim to be the author of queastionnaires B, C, D, they are well established reliable and validated, but questionnaire A is my design, it is 8 sections which correspond to Erikson's original 8 psychosocial stages, only the results and repetition will determine its reliability and validity. Factor analysis has yet to be carried out on it but from the results in so far (91 p's) it is producing evenly distributed data (ie not skewed which was a worry) and is positivly correlating with the 8 subscales (8 psychosocial stage strengths) in the coping styles questionnaire, so I am keeping my fingers crossed.
No BS, if you are seriously interested in research questionnaire design and implementation a couple of books I can recommend are.
'The Handbook of Psychological Testing' by Paul Kline, and 'Psychological Testing' by Anne Anastasi and Susana Urbina, both are 600-700 pages Its a complex subject.

Cathryn
(Having massive learning curve in 'excel' attempting to strengthen intellectual centre lol )

 

[CarpeDiem]

then the reliability of that participant is in question, not the questionnaire

Yes. i didn't question the validity of questionnaire, i asked if validity of participant was validated this way, and from your answer i see it is correct.

either in a deliberate attempt to lie or in a sort of deep denial self-protection mechanism way

yep