Méthodes de pré-test de questionnaire, les différentes techniques et organisations produisent-elles des résultats semblables ? : Depuis 20 ans, il y a eu un accroissement significatif dans l'utilisation de formes nouvelles de pré-tests de questionnaires. Diverses techniques d'évaluations ont été utilisées pour signaler les points forts et faibles de ces méthodes. Des études limitées ont été faites sur l'efficacité des interviews cognitifs dans la résolution des problèmes de questionnaire. Mais ces études n'ont pas distingué les effets des méthodes des effets de l'organisation. L'objectif de cette recherche est de déterminer comment des méthodes diverses utilisées par trois instituts d'enquête par questionnaire (U.S. Census Bureau, Westat Inc. et Research Triangle Institute) arrivent à prédire les problèmes. Pour cette recherche, plusieurs chercheurs dans chacun des instituts ont utilisé trois méthodes de pré-test (revue informelle par experts, un système formel d'évaluation cognitive, et l'interview cognitif) sur trois questionnaires dans une expérience tridimensionnelle de tris multiples. Une classification est faite des problèmes identifiés par les méthodes et ces problèmes sont comparés les uns aux autres. Nous calculons le degré d'accord entre les instituts et entre les méthodes. Nous concluons sur l'utilité et l'adéquation de chaque méthode, et le degré d'accord et le caractère systématique de ces résultats.
Beatty, P. ( 2004). The Dynamics of Cognitive Interviewing. In S. Presser, J. Rothgeb, M. Couper, J. Lessler, E. Martin, J. Martin, and E. Singer (eds.), Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires, pp 45-66. New York: Wiley.
2.
Beatty, P., Willis, G.B., and Schechter, S. ( 1997). Evaluating the generalizability of cognitive interview findings. In Office of Management and Budget Seminar on Statistical Methodology in the Public Service, Statistical Policy Working Paper26, pp. 353-362. Washington, DC: Statistical Policy Office.
3.
Beatty, P., and Willis, G. ( 2007). The Practice of Cognitive Interviewing. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71: 288-311.
4.
Campanelli, P. ( 1997). Testing survey questions: New directions in cognitive interviewing. Bulletin de Methodologie Sociologique, 55, 5-17.
5.
Conrad, F., and Blair, J. ( 1997). From impressions to data: Increasing the objectivity of cognitive interviews. Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods, American Statistical Association , 1-9.
6.
Davis, W.L., and DeMaio, T.J. (1993). Comparing the think-aloud interviewing technique with standard interviewing in the redesign of a dietary recall questionnaire. Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods, American Statistical Association , 565-570.
7.
DeMaio, T., Mathiowetz, N., Rothgeb, J., Beach, M.E., and Durant, S. ( 1993). Protocol for pretesting demographic surveys at the Census Bureau. Unpublished manuscript, Center for Survey Methods Research , U.S. Bureau of the Census.
8.
DeMaio, T., and Landreth, L. ( 2004). Do different cognitive interview techniques produce different results. In S. Presser, J. Rothgeb, M. Couper, J. Lessler, E. Martin, J. Martin, and E. Singer (eds.), Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires, pp 89-108. New York: Wiley.
9.
Esposito, J.L., and Rothgeb, J.M. ( 1997). Evaluating survey data: Making the transition from Pretesting to Quality Assessment. In L. Lyberg, P. Biemer, M. Collins, E. de Leeuw, C. Dippo , N. Schwarz , and D. Trewin (Eds.), Survey Measurement and Process Quality, pp 541-571. New York: Wiley .
10.
Foddy, W. ( 1996). The In-Depth Testing of Survey Questions: A Critical Appraisal of Methods. Quality and Quantity, 30, 361-370.
11.
Forsyth, B., and Lessler, J. ( 1991). Cognitive Laboratory Methods. In P. Biemer et al. (eds.), Measurement Errors in Surveys, New York: Wiley.
12.
Forsyth, B., Rothgeb, J., and Willis, G. ( 2004). Does Pretesting Make a Difference? An Experimental Test . In S. Presser, J. Rothgeb, M. Couper, J. Lessler, E. Martin, J. Martin, and E. Singer (eds.), Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires, pp 525-546. New York: Wiley.
13.
Fowler, F.J. ( 1992). How unclear terms affect survey data. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56: 218-231.
14.
Fowler, F.J. and Cosenza, C. ( 2000). Evaluating the results of cognitive interviews . Proceedings of the Workshop on Quality Issues in Question Testing , Office for National for National Statistics, London, 35-41.
15.
Gerber, E.R., and Wellens, T.R. ( 1997). Perspectives on pretesting: "Cognition" in the cognitive interview?Bulletin de Methodologie Sociologique , 55, 18-39.
16.
Lessler, J.T., Tourangeau, R. and Salter, W. ( 1989). Questionnaire design research in the cognitive research laboratory. Vital and Health Statistics (Series 6, No. 1; DHHS Publication No. PHS-89-1076). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
17.
Lessler, J.T., and Forsyth, B.H. ( 1996). A coding system for appraising questionnaires . In N. Schwarz and S. Sudman (Eds.), Answering questions: Methodology for determining cognitive and communicative processes in survey research (pp. 259-291). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18.
Lessler, J.T., and Rothgeb, J. ( 1999). Integrating cognitive research into household survey design. In A New Agenda for Interdisciplinary Survey Research Methods: Proceedings of the CASM II Seminar. National Center for Health Statistics, pp. 67-69.
19.
Oksenberg, L., Cannell, C., and Kalton, G. ( 1991). New Strategies for Pretesting Survey Questions . Journal of Official Statistics, 7, 3, pp. 349-365.
20.
Presser, J., and Blair, J. ( 1994). Survey Pretesting: Do Different Methods Produce Different Results?, in P.V. Marsden (ed.), Sociological Methodology, Vol. 24, Washington, DC: American Sociological Association, pp. 73-104.
21.
Rothgeb, J., and Willis, G. ( 1999). Evaluating pretesting techniques for finding and fixing questionnaire problems. Proceedings of the Workshop on Quality Issues in Question Testing, Office for National Statistics, London, 100-102.
22.
Schaeffer, N. and Dykema, J. ( 2004). A Multiple-Method Approach to Improving the Clarity of Closely Related Concepts: Distinguishing Legal and Physical Custody of Children . In S. Presser, J. Rothgeb, M. Couper, J. Lessler, E. Martin, J. Martin, and E. Singer (eds.), Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires, pp 475-502. New York: Wiley
23.
Tourangeau, R. ( 1984). Cognitive Science and Survey Methods. In T. Jabine et al. (eds.), Cognitive Aspects of Survey Design: Building a Bridge Between Disciplines, Washington: National Academy Press, pp. 73-100.
24.
Tucker, C. ( 1997). Measurement issues surrounding the use of cognitive methods in survey research. Bulletin de Methodologie Sociologique , 55, 67-92.
Willis, G.B., and Schechter, S. ( 1997). Evaluation of Cognitive interviewing Techniques: Do the Results Generalize to the Field?Bulletin de Methodologie Sociologique, 55, pp. 40-66.
27.
Willis, G.B., DeMaio T.J., and Harris-Kojetin B. (1999). Is the Bandwagon Headed to the Methodological Promised Land? Evaluating the Validity of Cognitive interviewing Techniques. In M. Sirken, D. Herrmann, S. Schechter , N. Schwarz, J. Tanur, and R. Tourangeau (Eds.). Cognition and Survey Research. New York: Wiley, 133-153.
28.
Willis, G.B., S. Schechter, and K. Whitaker ( 1999). A Comparison of Cognitive Interviewing, Expert Review, and Behavior Coding: What do They Tell Us?American Statistical Association, Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods .
