Questionnaire - Science topic

ok

Best of luck

Methodologically, efficient questionnaire Luna Leoni ! Success 1

The key to mixed methods is the integration of a set qualitative and quantitative results. If you did not have any qualitative results then you have a weak case of mixed methods at best.

I have answered

Iam a professor, and I lecture.

Hello Laila,

I agree with the second part of your answer. Regarding the first, may it be that you confuse that with PCA (principal component analysis)? These two are often used synonymously. Factor analysis specifically is a *model* that tries to identify underlying common causes of the observed variables--not to reduce the number of items. This is the goal of PCA (it applies no model but is a purely technical data reduction techique resulting in the lack of any surplus meaning of the components (not factors).

Best,

Holger

Can negative items exceed than positive items in scale?

Hello Qichu,

Here are some options:

1. Run a modest-sized pilot study, using participants from your target population.

2. Examine extant studies using similar measures and methods, and determine what sort of non-completion rates were noted therein. In some cases, you might have to contact author/s directly, if such information were absent from the study report.

3. Look for meta-analytic studies of response legitimacy rates for on-line surveys.

In most instances, you're safer off to over-sample rather than under-sample.

Good luck with your work.

Did anyone manage to find the full scale? Also having trouble finding it in any paper.

Thank you to all who provided answers. It seems that the PSS questionnaire could be a useful tool to administer before the test. However, I have some concerns about its ability to measure a difference in stress levels after the test. The questionnaire focuses on the subject's stress levels over the last month. How can it effectively capture changes in stress levels that may occur after the test?

Hello,

Can you please tell me how I should get permission to use the tool "Nursing Incivility scale".

By mailing the author Mr. AM Guidroz, I haven't got the permission till now. It's been 3 week.

And after searching it showed that I need to buy the tool but this tool cost more than 200 dollars which I can't afford.

Please tell me an alternative as this tool serves as an important part in my research methodology.

Please guide me how to seek his permission.

The article hyperlinked below may be of interest: it references questions that Westerman, Bonnet, and McAfee (2014) itemized for companies to frame, focus, mobilize, and sustain for digital transformation.

Dear Samuel,

I hope it helps you

EoQ5D is a prescribed structure, we cannot manipulate it. None will accept. In UK some health economics experts are discussed on " we needs to change EoQ5D as with time with transition of disease the method needs to modify", Professor Ric Fordham,UK is one of them.

As answer above use "Visual Analog Scale" if you wants to said QALY.

Additionally, can think about;

Likert scale:

It's a question that uses a 5 or 7-point scale. Typically, the Likert survey question includes a moderate or neutral option in its scale.

Your questionnaire is too long and the questions are repetitive - But the two questions never asked - made me stop. -- I never was asked if I want to engage with robots. Or, even if past experience on any level was satisfactory.

Did you contact them?

Australian Journal of Psychology Volume 58, Issue 2

First published: 02 February 2011

This paper describes the development of an instrument to assess coping strategies for auditory hallucinations. An inventory of coping strategies was obtained by conducting semi-structured interviews with 17 male participants. This inventory was then used to develop a 27-item questionnaire, the Responses to Auditory Hallucinations Questionnaire (RAHQ). The RAHQ was administered to 125 respondents. Measures of symptom severity, appraisal, anxiety, depression and coping dissatisfaction were also administered. Factor Analysis of the RAHQ yielded three coping subscales, Active coping, Passive coping and Suppression coping. The subscales were shown to be empirically distinct and to possess satisfactory internal reliability. For a small subgroup of participants, two of the three subscales demonstrated satisfactory test – retest reliability. Construct validity was assessed within a stress and coping framework. The RAHQ will facilitate the investigation of the efficacy of coping strategies for the management of auditory hallucinations.

Here's a guide I've used on cannabis-related scales. It's slightly outdated (from 2016), and there may be newer ones. https://adai.uw.edu/pubs/pdf/2016marijuanascreenassess.pdf

Some options include:

Marijuana Quit Questionnaire, MJQQ (Copersino et al., 2006)

Marijuana Decisional Balance Scale, MDBS (Elliott et al., 2011)

Marijuana Ladder (Slavet et al., 2006)

Marijuana Motives Measure, MMM (Simons et al., 1998) i

Comprehensive Marijuana Motives Questionnaire, CMMQ (Lee et al., 2009)

I bought the full package and it has no Farsi version, however, I translated the English version to Farsi and used it in my study.

There are several survey questionnaires that assess principal leadership. Some examples include:

Congratulations on your studies Michael. I wish you much luck !!! Psychodelics or "enteogens" as the first term was more of the 70's, are not "my cup of tea" as I do prefer what Assaglioli called "the soft path". That is meditation and development of Consciousness to arrive to the same "state".

"The experience" is in a level/layer of higher consciousness (see the difference with capital "C") and without the need of seeing things on the move or the change of colors or the interaction with mother plants or other let's say external "artifacts", the deepest "Aha" experience of opening, understanding and connection with higher realms of the psiche and the mysterious "beyond" is the very same.

That's why I do not need psychoactives to feel, recognize and experience real changes in my Conscious life (that, then, become "permanent" and non "temporary" as may be with them). Plus, I do not have the negative effects in my neurons, blood and liver.

I'm not against the use of enteogens (and much more less against the people that "intake" them). I just say that I do not use them or like them FOR ME. And yet, as an experienced Integral Psychologist I would recommed the use for those people which are soooo intellectual, so CLOSED in their tunel vision that do not think (much more less "sense" that there's anything else than what they can see, touch and hear.

I would recommed those people to read with open mind and good heart, William James, Suzuki, Assagliogli and Ken Wilber PLUS meditate (taught by an experienced meditation master) from half an hour to one hour every day during one year.

Then if they have not change anything in their inner perception of life and "things"; in their view about "reality", then and only then, I would recommed to take "enteogens" (preferably natural psychoactives like: peyote, psilocybe, salvia divinorum or the most used lately, the ayahuasca) to crack their rigid armor !!!

try this if it is work

PDFfiller - multifactor leadership questionnaire pdf.pdf

Feel free to check this out regarding to the Orang Asli research:

For your rating scale questionnnaire, ithere should be some checking question in each set of questions so that we know whether the respondants really rate their ideas on a particular item. Foe example, the whole set of questions are talking about the effectivenewss of a supervisor. There should be a question that illustrate the ineffectiveness of the supervisor. If the students tick all with 4-5 so it means the answer is not consistency.

Are you concerned with whether the respondent will answer honestly? If so, you could research the "random response method." It is a way of collecting the data where it will not be known for sure which people answered "yes" because they really did use drugs illegally. Perhaps you know this. I just wanted to be certain.

(See "random response method," "random response technique," "random response sampling," "random response," "randomized response.")

Undoubtedly, Google Forms is a better and easier medium for primary data collection in this technological age.

But, sometimes relying solely on Google Forms is harmful because with the help of Google Forms, we can reach only those people who have communication tools while the other part has nothing to do with it.

Hence there is a need of some pilot survey for some quality checks and take a realistic picture.

This is an older questionnaire, but it has been evaluated for validity and reliability more recently. You might want to review those studies to see if the stats are acceptable for your population. You need evidence to show that one night is enough for subjects to use a specific condition and get a significant change.

Also, what is the impact of subjects taking the same tool every day for up to 28 days? Does anyone suggest rotating the order of the questions in the PSQI for that long a use?

Great idea! Good luck with this project.

Hello Abdelrahman,

The answer depends on what comparison(s) you wish to make.

If you wish to evaluate, separately for each item:

1. Whether "A" or "B" are equally often selected, regardless of the numeric rating chosen (other than "1", of course): Use a binomial test of Ho: p = .50

2. The numeric ratings for those who choose "A" for an item are comparable to the numeric ratings for those who choose "B" for an item: Use Mann-Whitney test of Ho: Identical distributions for each preferred scenario. Each person's response (except "1") would put them in one of the two batches per item.

If you wish to evaluate, for the aggregate set of 50 items:

1. Whether "A" or "B" are equally often selected over the set of items, regardless of the numeric rating: Sum the "A" ratings across all persons and cases, and sum the "B" ratings across all persons and cases. Use either binomial test, or chi-square goodness-of-fit test (assuming equal proportions under the null hypothesis). This presumes each person's response is independent for each item.

2. Whether numeric ratings are equal across items: Re-scale the ratings from their current values to 9..2 for "A" choice (note: no change), "1" for equal choice (no change), then 0..-7 for "B" choice (or, if you prefer, -2..-9 for "B" choice). Use Friedman two-way anova by ranks.

3. Whether median numeric ratings for "A" scenario selections over the set of items are comparable to median numeric ratings for "B" scenario selections: Take median of all "A" choice selections by a participant over the items, then a median of all "B" selections over the items. Treat these as paired values, and use Wilcoxon signed-ranks sum test.

This doesn't exhaust the possibilities, but may help to underscore that the choice of analytic method depends on both the nature of the data and the specific research question one wishes to address.

Good luck with your work.

Questionnaire adaption to suit research context is common.

.....

Good catch Bruce Weaver , I assumed 1 as the minimum, and this despite two hours ago having colleagues change scales from 1-10 to 0-10 for a study we are about to send to IRB.

Google Forms is mostly used

Home > Mental Health Worksheets:

In my opinion it depends on the context. A questionnaire is an instrument that collects information by means of a series of closed or open questions. The notion of an instrument is more general than that of a questionnaire, and encompasses individual and group interviews, systematic or participant observation, tests, scales, checklists, sorting, experiments, etc. Regarding your question, I think the more specific term should be used.

I don’t believe the publishers have made those particular measures available in an online format

thanks Norkhairi Bin Ahmad

Sorry I don't have children. Will share it with those who do. Good luck with your research.

Dear Ayse Seyma Turgut Arikan ,

Thank you for the interesting question. In my opinion, content validity and the instrument's reliability are proven by experts to be useful and important even if you modified the questions or not. Also, in the case of a different language.

Kind Regards,

Perhaps the safest strategy would be to treat these responses as missing values and subsequently use multiple imputation to address missing item scores. Another strategy could be to assign a score of 1.5, 2.5, etc. in these cases if you think it is plausible that these participants were trying to respond "in between" 1 and 2 (or 2 and 3 etc.).

In reality, it is the parents of these children who will answer the questionnaire and my research is qualitative.

As Holger Steinmetz notes, there are several definitions for validity. While the Kane one (which I assume is what the APA cites) is popular and seems the most widely used these days, it is worth saying what you mean by validity. To answer your question, you likely are wanting to address how valid with whatever definition your questions in the sample that you use are (as well as reliability and fairness).

I think the bottom line of the reviewer comment is that the cross-sectional design is inadequate for examining the focal research question or hypotheses on causal effects. This is not primarily a stats issue but a matter of research methods in more general terms.

I have seen lots of submissions to academic journals applying sequential designs. That is, researchers introduce a time lag of a few weeks between measuring predictor and criterion, but do not include repeated measures of the focal variable (no panel data). In my view, such designs are a more or less desparate attempt to avoid desk rejection because of cross-sectional data.

There is quite a bit research that suggests that sequential designs do not perform better than cross-sectional data (see below).

I agree that experimental or real longitidunal survey data are a much better fit to test causal effects. In my view, providing evidence for causality is possible in limited ways to impossible with non-experimental data. I can recommend the chapter of John Antonakis discussing among other things the role of third variables. I like his example of a loud noise occurring (instead of a rifle) causes discs to be shattered, because the correlation between the occurrence of a crack and the condition of the discs is so highly correlated. :-)

In my view, leaving the causality obsession (in psychology) aside, there are lots of meaningful and important research questions that can be addressed with correlational data (even cross-sectional data), e.g. regarding the interplay of variables or the relative weight of predictors (no matter if these predictors are the only or real causes).

Best

Oliver

Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (2014). Causality and Endogeneity. The Oxford Handbook of Leadership and Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199755615.013.007

O’Laughlin, K. D., Martin, M. J., & Ferrer, E. (2018). Cross-Sectional Analysis of Longitudinal Mediation Processes. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 53(3), 375–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2018.1454822

Mitchell, M. A., & Maxwell, S. E. (2013). A Comparison of the Cross-Sectional and Sequential Designs when Assessing Longitudinal Mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 48(3), 301–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2013.784696

Done

A couple of things to remember here: in a prospectus assemble the following:

a. The research questions and summarize responses by data type

b. The potential tests of the hypotheses from a

c choose tests based on a and b

d choose sample sizes based on chosen tests and type I and Ii requirements

e conduct methods of d

f answer the research questions based on e

g check the assumptions required in e

h

Prepare summary report of results

Suggestions- 0 Proper Prior Planning Prevents Poor Performance

1 get a good book on research design

2 Study it

3 Follow the suggestions for each step

4 assemble the overall plan

5 collect data as in plan 4

6see f, g and h above

7 do not ever do what you did in this

question again

Good luck David Booth

Please clarify. Do you want to know the reading comprehension level viz a viz standardized tests or do you want middle school students to evaluate themselves, like Marsh's academic self-concept (ASC) for language arts?

Lewis Maccarter

Hi Lewis,

Thank you. Before the research, I had looked up before/after and decided on Pearson Correlation coefficient but when doing more research, realised this might be wrong?

I'll take a look on YouTube. For my literature review, I have identified several papers that have similar studies, but again, they all use a different method so that's why I'm unsure on which way to approach it

Thank you for your help - I'll also check out that book!

Eimear

In my opinion, it is not valid to compare the outcome from two different scales.

A validated questionare can be very helpful

Dear Amila Abeynayaka . I think the question must be highlighted social world issues (scientific &non scientific ) .

. Thank you.

Exactly, Cronbach's alpha indicates whether the items measure the same construct. The minimum acceptable value for Cronbach's alpha ca 0.70; Below this value the internal consistency of the common range is low. Meanwhile, the maximum expected value is 0.90; Above this value is perceived as redundancy or duplication.

The VFI to measure motivations in volunteering studies, to be used today, should be adapted to the particular circumstance of the study in question. Adaptation work.

Hello Fatima,

The instrument is mentioned in the text by Perlmutter, Tuliatos, & Holden (2001), Handbook of Family Measurement Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. However, it may be just a mention.

If you know of studies that used this measure, I'd try contacting one of the authors other than Kurden to see whether they could furnish a copy of the instrument.

However, this link may be the one you're looking for, as it references Kurden: https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/conflict-resolution-styles-inventory-crsi/

Good luck with your work.

Daniel Wright 8 athletes, different settings/outfits. n around 60 and question is basically just do attitudes towards male and female athletes differ within the particular sport’s community - the survey is only one part of the overall study, but the other parts aren’t relevant to the analysis of this bit.

Good Luck, All the Best Marián Čvirik

Childhood trauma questionnaire : a retrospective self-report : manual

Author:David P Bernstein; Laura Fink Publisher:Orlando : Psychological Corporation, 1998.

Ask this from your library

Hi Ahmad Usman

Did you manage to solve this problem?

I came across the same issue as your.

Did you happen to find good reference for this procedure?

thanks in advance.

T

Cronbach’s alpha, which is a measure used to assess the reliability, or internal consistency, of a set of scale or test items.

Base on my findings so far in this area of study (well being), RYFF scale remains a valid scale for this measurement. I conducted a study using the scale. However i adopted only the subsections that were relevant to my area of concern. Attached is a copy of the publication in case someone still need to see

Yes Talha, you get free access to the Moca test at > https://www.mocatest.org

You will have to demonstrate your competence qualifications to get the required badge.

A useful example of a Functional backup is to ask the client to carry out a simple task AND report back to you through her/his nurse (or email /phone message, etc). Simple tasks like "Please send me your contact information tomorrow", or "Please draw a copy of the shape on this page, then give it to your nurse tomorrow morning", require INITIATIVE, a major executive function skill not tested by simple tests like MOCA where initiative is provided by the tester.

Note that the second task mentioned above requires LESS initiative than the first, since you leave behind a tangible cue for compliance.

Good fortune, Paul

xPsychologist Paul McGaffey, PhD(ABD)

A semi-structured questionnaire is a method for collecting qualitative and quantitative data systematically. Its use should be driven by the study purpose and design—albeit yours is not clearly pointed out. For its analysis, you might start by cleaning the collected data, especially for the open-ended questions, with the study objectives or questions in mind. Afterward, you could apply thematic analysis, using theory-driven coding, i.e., approaching the data with specific questions that underlie the coding process. You could refer to the following references for insights.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2020). Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern‐based qualitative analytic approaches. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 21(1), 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12360

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. SAGE. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/successful-qualitative-research/book233059

Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,16(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

Good luck,

Hi! Usually the questionnaires should be pre-tested with the experts in the respective fields for the content validity. If the researcher is using established scale then pilot testing with minimum sample size of 30 can be used to check the reliability of the scale based on Cronbach's Alpha. If the scale is new then it is suggested to run the exploratory factor analysis. Thanks.

try mixRasch or eRM

Amjad Pervez Strictly speaking, Cronbach's alpha only makes sense when your variables are measured on an interval scale (i.e., when you have continuous/metrical/scale-level variables) and when the variables are in line with the classical test theory (CTT) model of (essential) tau equivalence (or stricter models). Essential tau-equivalence implies that the variables/items measure a single factor/common true score variable (i.e., that they are unidimensional) with equal loadings. For variables that are only congeneric (measure a single factor/dimension but have different factor loadings), Cronbach's alpha underestimates reliability. For multidimensional scales, Cronbach's alpha tends to be completely meaningless. For categorical (binary and ordinal) variables, psychometric models and scaling procedures of item response theory are usually more appropriate that procedures derived from CTT which assumes continuous (scale-level) variables.

Maybe you could describe the content of your variables (and the answer options) in a bit more detail. That would make it easier for folks on Researchgate to see which procedure may be appropriate for you.

Not from India but interesting survey Sarthak Sengupta

Good explanation is performed by Bruce Weaver, best regards

Hello

In the non-normal situation, Spearman correlation is a suitable method

Would anybody pls make a refrence to acceptable coefficients for discriminant validity?

It is unavoidable to have biases in our research. However, as long as we mention our limitations and define the scope of bias in our study, good research may impact our learning community.

1. In children aged 7 to 10 years, there is a relationship between the accuracy of a simple motor response and testerone, which means that there are differences in the accuracy of reproduction of joint angles and amplitude of movement. After 10-11 years, boys will better memorize single movements faster.

2.After 10-11 years, differences in the level of manifestation of muscular endurance, absolute strength and speed-strength readiness. At the same time, movement is better retained in memory with an equal number of repetitions for which the most favorable age-related physiological period of development is now. If the number of hours of training is the same for boys and girls, then boys after 10-11 years old will remember faster and perform better motor tasks associated with the manifestation of muscular endurance, absolute strength, and speed-strength training than girls at the same age.

Have you found an answer?

depends on measure.

Always first hand data collection is preferred as the researcher has the options to get more information through questions which are appropriate but are not though of before. also, you are sure to get response.

In the digital form, a questionnaire must be well thought, well prepared and exhaustive. Of course even then it is difficult to get response from all the addresses.

The first one is time consuming, requires a lot of effort, but is more scientific and secured than the second one. Although the second approach is preferred now a days because of time constraint and ease of acess.

For Anxiety the "BAI" (Beck Anxiety Inventory) and, for Depression, the "BDI" (Beck Depression Inventory) ... Idem Hamilton

I want to develop an questionnaire on Knowledge, attitude s, practice s on non Communicable Diseases. I'm searching previous research questions.

Dear Mahindra Bandari ,

If you want to conduct the study on children and adolescents, you might be interested to use the EQ-5D-Y.

Please be referred to the following documents

Or refer to the official website

This paper and its reference list should help:

Marsh, H. W., Martin, A. J., & Jackson, S. (2010). Introducing a short version of the physical self description questionnaire: new strategies, short-form evaluative criteria, and applications of factor analyses. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 32(4), 438-482.