The author discusses the more general lessons that can be learned from Jacoby and Szybillo's (1995) and Stewart's (1995) articles on the Federal Trade Commission v. Kraft, Inc. (1991) case. The lessons relate to issues of materiality, definitions of the universe, context effects, and questionnaire wording. Because of the complexity of questionnaire design, it is not surprising that experts will disagree, and such disagreements need not lead to reductions in public confidence about consumer surveys.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Federal Trade Commission v. Kraft, Inc. (1991), Final Order. Docket No. 9208, (January 30), Lexus 38.
2.
JacobyJacob, and SzybilloGeorge J., (1995), “Consumer Research in FTC V. Kraft (1991): A Case of Heads We Win, Tails You Lose?”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14(Spring), 1–14.
3.
KahnRobert L., and CannellCharles F., (1957), The Dynamics of Interviewing.New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
4.
RichardsJef I., and PrestonIvan, (1992), “Proving and Disproving Materiality of Deceptive Advertising Claims,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 11(Fall) 45–56.
5.
SchumanHoward, and PresserStanley, (1981), Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys.New York: Academic Press.
6.
SchwarzNorbert, and SudmanSeymour, (1991), Context Effects in Social and Psychological Research.New York: Springer-Verlag.
7.
SmithTom W. (1991) “Context Effects in the General Social Survey” inMeasurement Error in Surveys, BiemerPaul P., eds. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 57–72.
8.
StewartDavid W. (1995) “Deception, Materiality, and Survey Research: Some Lessons from Kraft,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14(Spring), 15–28.
9.
SudmanSeymour, and BradburnNorman M., (1982), Asking Questions.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
