Search results

Purpose – A major limitation in cross-cultural research continues to be attempts to compare construct measurements across cultures without adequate conceptual and empirical evidence of the equivalency of the measurement scores. Of significant concern in such studies is the presence of various types of response bias that may systematically differ from one culture to another, resulting in a potential violation of the assumption that measurement scores across cultures are equivalent. The focus of this study is to investigate the role of the response format type, extreme response style (ERS). Most studies have investigated response bias styles using Likert-type scales as response formats, yet it has long been argued that these particular formats tend to result in various types of response style bias, especially in cross-cultural research. Would other scaling devices, such as semantic differential (SD), lessen response style bias in pan-cultural studies? To answer this question, our study employs two types of response formats (i.e., Liker-type and SD) to empirically test for the presence of ERS within each response format style.

Methodology/approach – This chapter takes the form of empirical research using ERS indices to test for the degree of ERS between response formats using samples from a collectivistic culture (i.e., South Korea) and an individualistic culture (i.e., United States).

Findings – Results show that samples from both cultures exhibit greater levels of ERS when using Likert-type scales compared to SD scales. Additionally, this study finds that, when using Likert-type scales, ERS is greater for U.S. respondents than for South Korea respondents. Finally, results show that there is no statistically significant difference in ERS between the two cultural groups when using SD response formats.

Research implications – Findings show that the use of SD response formats eliminates systematic differences in ERS between a collectivist sample and an individualist sample. Therefore, the use of such response formats in future cross-cultural research can greatly diminish the problematic effects of culturally based ERS and lead to greater confidence in the equivalency of measurement scores across cultures.

Originality/value of paper – This study is the first to simultaneously assess culturally based ERS using two types of response formats to investigate the impact of response format on ERS. Furthermore, this study assesses the role of response format on ERS both within and between two distinctly different cultures.

The study investigates extreme response style (ERS) in cross‐cultural research. Through a four‐country application of the Greenleaf ERS measure, finds that ERS varies between cultures and across response formats. Evidence is also found that the acquiescence response style (ARS) varies between cultures and response formats. Through a series of ANOVAs, it is shown how a post hoc response style adjustment can be used to minimize between‐group differences for ERS and ARS. Finally, this study illustrates how cross‐cultural market researchers, using a marketing‐oriented survey instrument like the CETSCALE, could reach erroneous conclusions by failing to adjust for between‐group difference in ERS. Implications for cross‐cultural marketing research are discussed.

Psychometric analyses of self-administered questionnaire data tend to focus on items and instruments as a whole. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the functioning of the response scale and its impact on measurement precision. In terms of the response scale direction, existing evidence is mixed and inconclusive.

Three experiments are conducted to examine the functioning of response scales of different direction, ranging from agree to disagree versus from disagree to agree. The response scale direction effect is exemplified by two different latent constructs by applying the Rasch model for measurement.

The agree-to-disagree format generally performs better than the disagree-to-agree variant with spatial proximity between the statement and the agree-pole of the scale appearing to drive the effect. The difference is essentially related to the unit of measurement.

A careful investigation of the functioning of the response scale should be part of every psychometric assessment. The framework of Rasch measurement theory offers unique opportunities in this regard.

Besides content, validity and reliability, academics and practitioners utilising published measurement instruments are advised to consider any evidence on the response scale functioning that is available.

The study exemplifies the application of the Rasch model to assess measurement precision as a function of the design of the response scale. The methodology raises the awareness for the unit of measurement, which typically remains hidden.

Academic researchers love multi‐category answer formats, especially five‐ and seven‐point formats. More than a decade ago Josef Mazanec concluded that these formats may not the best choice, and that simple binary‐answer options are preferable in some empirical survey contexts. The purpose of the present study is to investigate empirically Mazanec's hypothesis in the context of the measurement of evaluative beliefs relating to fast‐food restaurants.

The authors conducted an online experiment that asked respondents to assess evaluative beliefs relating to fast‐food brands using either a forced binary (n=100) or a seven‐point answer format (n=100). The authors also measured preferences for each of the fast‐food restaurants, user friendliness, and recorded the actual completion times for the survey.

The results indicate that the full binary answer format outperforms the popular seven‐point multi‐category format with respect to stability, concurrent validity, and speed of completion.

Given the demonstrated strengths of full binary measures, they should be used more by both practitioners and academics when measuring evaluative beliefs.

This study provides empirical evidence of the strong performance of the forced binary‐answer format for the measurement of evaluative beliefs, and thus challenges current measurement practice among academics and practitioners.

This study aims to achieve broad insights into perceptions and attitudes of Turkish digital immigrants (DI) and digital natives (DN) toward native advertising (NA) format.

Based on extant review of literature, semi-structured interview questions helped to solicit subjective interpretations, perceptions and attitudes of Turkish consumers toward NA format. In-depth interviews with 36 participants were conducted.

The study gains new knowledge on issues related to NA format, such as self-determination of viewing, privacy and accuracy of information. Findings provide whys and wherefores for these undiscovered issues, as well as for preexisting themes such as format recall and recognition, disclosure, communication/marketing aims, attitudes toward NA format, brand and publisher, NA placement and “nativity” of the format. In terms of perceptions and attitudes of DIs and DNs, both similarities and differences exist. DNs consider viewing NA content under their own initiative, so their perceptions and attitudes toward NA are shaped accordingly.

The interviews were carried out in a single setting; with a convenience sample of consumers living in Izmir, Turkey. Certain age and education levels were considered desirable as main criteria for selection.

The study identifies consumer concerns on the NA format and content; and provides suggestions for advertisers, publishers and ad professionals on disclosure, relevancy and frequency of exposure, which can be applied in practice. Implications for public policy are also discussed.

This is the first known study to explore perceptions and attitudes of DIs and DNs toward NA format in the Turkish context. This study uncovers and discusses insights into underlying reasons of DI/DNs’ perceptions and attitudes. The study extends prior findings of quantitative research on NA, offering fruitful insights for future research.

We integrate cross-cultural literature with broader literature in survey methodology, human cognition, and communication. First, we briefly review recent work in cognitive survey methodology that advances our understanding of the processes underlying question comprehension and response. Then, using a process model of cultural influence, we provide a framework for hypothesizing how cross-cultural differences may systematically influence the meaning respondents make of the questions that researchers ask, how memory is organized, and subjective theories about what constitutes an appropriate answer and therefore the answers participants are likely to give.

The purpose of this paper is to critically review past recommendations to correct for cultural biases in empirical survey data sets, and propose a framework that enables the researcher to assess the robustness of empirical findings from culture‐specific response styles (CSRS).

The paper proposes to analyze a set of derived data sets, including the original data as well as data corrected for response styles using theoretically plausible correction methods for the empirical data at hand. The level of agreement of results across correction methods indicates the robustness of findings to possible contamination of data by cross‐cultural response styles.

The proposed method can be used to inform researchers and data analysts about the extent to which the validity of their conclusions is threatened by data contamination and provides guidance regarding the results that can safely be reported.

Response styles can distort survey findings. CSRS are particularly problematic for researchers using multicultural samples because the resulting data contamination can lead to inaccurate conclusions about the research question under study.

The proposed approach avoids the disadvantages of ignoring the problem and interpreting spurious results or choosing one single correction technique that potentially introduces new kinds of data contamination.

The existence of variable response styles represents a major threat to the correct interpretation of market research findings. In international marketing, this threat is further increased due to samples of respondents from different cultural backgrounds. The purpose of this paper is to extend the investigation of differences in cross‐cultural response styles by studying full response patterns instead of extreme values, quantify the extent of the potential mistake of not accounting for cross‐cultural differences in response behaviour and present a simple way of testing whether or not data sets from various cultural backgrounds can be used without correcting for cross‐cultural response styles.

Two independent data sets are used. Extreme response style (ERS) scores are compared by testing for equality of proportions. Respondents' answer patterns are partitioned using the k‐means algorithm, the resulting differences between cultures tested using a Fisher's exact test for count data. The extent of inter‐cultural difference in responses is assessed using ANOVA.

Asian and Australian respondents differ significantly in ERS and full response patterns. Differences in cross‐cultural response patterns account for up to 6 per cent of the variance in the data, thus representing a significant potential source for misinterpretation in cross‐cultural studies.

International market researchers using samples including respondents from more than one cultural background have to be aware of the potential source of misinterpretation caused by cross‐cultural differences in response patterns. A simple ANOVA‐based procedure allows researchers to determine whether data can be used in its uncorrected form.

The paper investigates cross‐cultural response styles for new groups of respondents (Australian vs Asian), extends the study from the investigation of extreme values to full response patterns and gives market researchers in the international marketing context an indication of how high the level of potential misinterpretation can be and presents a simple means of checking how necessary it is to account for cross‐cultural differences in response behaviour.

Survey research has developed to become the default empirical approach to answering research questions in the field of hospitality (and many other fields of research within the social sciences). This paper aims to reflect on the use of survey research in hospitality and offers recommendations for improvement.

First, known dangers to validity associated with survey research are discussed. Next, a sample of studies recently published in leading hospitality journals is assessed in view of these known dangers. Finally, recommendations are offered for editors, reviewers, readers and authors to mitigate the risk of drawing invalid conclusions based on survey research.

Survey research is very common in hospitality research and is used to investigate a wide range of research questions and constructs under study. The nature of constructs studied, the answer scales used and the nature of the samples point to a substantial risk to the validity of conclusions drawn.

A number of risk mitigation measures are proposed that can help authors minimise the risks to validity arising from known dangers associated with survey research. These same risk mitigation measures can be used by editors and reviewers in the assessment of manuscripts and by readers to evaluate the validity of conclusions drawn in already published work.

The value of this study lies in reflecting from a distance on how the survey research is conducted in the social sciences in general and in hospitality research in specific. The paper reveals that some routine approaches particularly prone to undermining the validity of conclusions may have been adopted and offers a few suggestions how this risk can be mitigated.

Memory impairments in the elderly have been widely studied in the past. This study focuses on the effects of these memory impairments on the ability of mature consumers to respond to brand attitude scales. An experimental study investigates the impact of age and type of measurement scale on responses to brand attitude scales. Groups of seniors within the elderly market (55‐65, 66‐75, and over 75) are investigated as opposed to contrasting two extreme points on the continuum, namely the elderly versus the young. Three commonly used attitude scales were manipulated to determine how age interacts with the form of scale to generate response bias. Three types of response bias; extremity response, acquiescence, and item non‐response were investigated. Results indicate a significant interaction between age and type of scale. Implications of these results for those involved in marketing to seniors are highlighted.