A program designed to administer questionnaires on IBM and IBM-compatible personal computers is documented. The program prompts subjects to indicate their response by clicking on a graphic line segment displayed on the screen or by entering a numeric value using the keyboard. Features of the program include (a) easily modifiable anchors for the graphic line segment (e.g., agree-disagree, satisfied-dissatisfied), (b) no limit to the number of questions included, and (c) responses that are stored directly into an ASCII file. The program enhances the accuracy in estimating moderating effects because it overcomes two limitations of the more traditional paper-and-pencil mode of administration: (a) transcriptional errors and (b) scale coarseness.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aguinis, H. (1995). Statistical power problems with moderated multiple regression in management research. Journal of Management, 21, 1141-1158.
2.
Aguinis, H. , Nesler, M. S., Quigley, B. M., Lee, S., & Tedeschi, J. T. (1996). Power bases of faculty supervisors and educational outcomes for graduate students. Journal of Higher Education, 67, 267-297.
3.
Aguinis, H. , & Pierce, C. A. (1995, April). Combating heterogeneity of residual variance in moderator variable detection. Paper presented at the meeting of the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association, Boulder, CO.
4.
Aguinis, H. , Pierce, C. A., & Stone-Romero, E. F. (1994). Estimating the power to detect dichotomous moderators with moderated multiple regression. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 690-692.
5.
Aguinis, H. , & Stone-Romero, E. F (in press). Methodological artifacts in moderated multiple regression and their effects on statistical power. Journal of Applied Psychology.
6.
Booth-Kewley, S. , Edwards, J. E., & Rosenfeld, P. (1992). Impression management, social desirability, and computer administration of attitude questionnaires: Does the computer make a difference?Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 562-566.
7.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
Hunter, J. E. , & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
9.
Lautenschlager, Q. J. , & Flaherty, V. L. (1990). Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more social desirability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 310-314.
10.
Lee, J. A. , Moreno, K. E., & Sympson, J. B. (1986). The effects of mode of test administration on test performance. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 467-474.
11.
Mead, A. D. , & Drasgow, F. (1993). Equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 449-458.
12.
Nesler, M. S. , Aguinis, H., Quigley, B. M., & Tedeschi, J. T. (1993). The effect of credibility on perceived power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1407-1425.
13.
Russell, C. J. , & Bobko, P. (1992). Moderated regression analysis and Likert scales: Too coarse for comfort. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 336-342.
14.
Russell, C. J. , Pinto, J., & Bobko, P. (1991). Appropriate moderated regression and inappropriate research strategy: A demonstration of the need to give your respondents space. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 257-266.
15.
Schmidt, F. L. , Law, K., Hunter, J. E., Rothstein, H. R., Pearlman, K., & McDaniel, M. (1993). Refinements in validity generalization methods: Implications for the situational specificity hypothesis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 3-12.
16.
Stone-Romero, E. F. , Alliger, G. M., & Aguinis, H. (1994). Type II error problems in the use of moderated multiple regression for the detection of moderating effects of dichotomous variables. Journal of Management, 20, 167-178.
17.
Zedeck, S. (1971). Problems with the use of "moderator" variables. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 295-310.
