Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

6 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Information loss and bias in likert survey responses.

ABSTRACT: Likert response surveys are widely applied in marketing, public opinion polls, epidemiological and economic disciplines. Theoretically, Likert mapping from real-world beliefs could lose significant amounts of information, as they are discrete categorical metrics. Similarly, the subjective nature of Likert-scale data capture, through questionnaires, holds the potential to inject researcher biases into the statistical analysis. Arguments and counterexamples are provided to show how this loss and bias can potentially be substantial under extreme polarization or strong beliefs held by the surveyed population, and where the survey instruments are poorly controlled. These theoretical possibilities were tested using a large survey with 14 Likert-scaled questions presented to 125,387 respondents in 442 distinct behavioral-demographic groups. Despite the potential for bias and information loss, the empirical analysis found strong support for an assumption of minimal information loss under Normal beliefs in Likert scaled surveys. Evidence from this study found that the Normal assumption is a very good fit to the majority of actual responses, the only variance from Normal being slightly platykurtic (kurtosis ~ 2) which is likely due to censoring of beliefs after the lower and upper extremes of the Likert mapping. The discussion and conclusions argue that further revisions to survey protocols can assure that information loss and bias in Likert-scaled data are minimal.

SUBMITTER: Westland JC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9333316 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Are the Steps on Likert Scales Equidistant? Responses on Visual Analog Scales Allow Estimating Their Distances

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC10795572 | biostudies-literature

Editorial Bias in Crowd-Sourced Political Information.

Project description:The Internet has dramatically expanded citizens' access to and ability to engage with political information. On many websites, any user can contribute and edit "crowd-sourced" information about important political figures. One of the most prominent examples of crowd-sourced information on the Internet is Wikipedia, a free and open encyclopedia created and edited entirely by users, and one of the world's most accessed websites. While previous studies of crowd-sourced information platforms have found them to be accurate, few have considered biases in what kinds of information are included. We report the results of four randomized field experiments that sought to explore what biases exist in the political articles of this collaborative website. By randomly assigning factually true but either positive or negative and cited or uncited information to the Wikipedia pages of U.S. senators, we uncover substantial evidence of an editorial bias toward positivity on Wikipedia: Negative facts are 36% more likely to be removed by Wikipedia editors than positive facts within 12 hours and 29% more likely within 3 days. Although citations substantially increase an edit's survival time, the editorial bias toward positivity is not eliminated by inclusion of a citation. We replicate this study on the Wikipedia pages of deceased as well as recently retired but living senators and find no evidence of an editorial bias in either. Our results demonstrate that crowd-sourced information is subject to an editorial bias that favors the politically active.

| S-EPMC4558055 | biostudies-literature

Loss-framing of information and pre-vaccination consultation improve COVID-19 vaccine acceptance: A survey experiment.

Project description:BackgroundsVaccination remains one of the most effective ways to protect populations from COVID-19 infection, severe conditions, and death. This study aims to examine whether the gain/loss-framing of information, provision of subsidized pre-vaccination physician consultation, and cash incentives can improve COVID-19 acceptance amongst adults.MethodsA survey experiment was conducted within a broader cross-sectional survey of people aged 18-64 years in Hong Kong, China. The participants were randomly assigned to one of the eight groups derived from full-factorial design of the three strategies with stratification by age and sex. The vaccine acceptance rate was compared between people with and without any of the strategies. The heterogeneous effects of these strategies were identified for those with different perceptions of the pandemics and vaccine in multiple logistic regressions.ResultsThe survey experiment collected 1,000 valid responses. It found that loss-framed information and provision of subsidized physician consultation to assess suitability to be vaccinated, can improve vaccine acceptance, while cash incentives did not make a difference. The improvement effect of loss-framing information and physician consultation is stronger among those with higher perceived infection risk and severity of condition, as well as unvaccinated people with lower confidence in vaccine safety.ConclusionsThe findings indicated that individualized loss-framing messages and equitable provision of subsidized pre-vaccination physician consultations can be incorporated in efforts to promote vaccine acceptance and vaccination roll-out speed. However, it remains inconclusive whether and how universal cash incentives may be deployed to support vaccination promotion.

| S-EPMC9902910 | biostudies-literature

A survey study of women's responses to information about overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening in Britain.

Project description:BackgroundThere is concern about public understanding of overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening, and uncertainty about the likely impact on screening participation.MethodsIn a population-based survey of 2272 women, we assessed understanding of overdiagnosis and screening intentions before and after exposure to an explanation of overdiagnosis, and one of the three information formats providing an estimate of the rate of overdiagnosis based on the findings of the UK Independent Review.ResultsSubjective and objective comprehension of overdiagnosis was moderate across information formats (64% and 57%, respectively). Following overdiagnosis information, 7% of women showed a decrease in screening intention, with a stronger effect among women below screening age (<47 years), and receiving the estimate of the rate of overdiagnosis in a simple ratio format (one life saved to three overdiagnoses).ConclusionsBrief written information on overdiagnosis was incompletely understood, but reduced breast screening intentions in a proportion of women, regardless of comprehension. Subjective comprehension was lower among women who had not yet reached screening age but the deterrent effect was higher.

| S-EPMC4453735 | biostudies-literature

The male-female health-survival paradox: a survey and register study of the impact of sex-specific selection and information bias.

Project description:PURPOSE:This study examined whether the health-survival paradox could be due partially to sex-specific selection and information bias in surveys. METHODS:The study is based on the linkage of three population-based surveys of 15,330 Danes aged 46-102 years with health registers covering the total Danish population regarding hospitalizations within the last 2 years and prescription medicine within 6 months before the baseline surveys. RESULTS:Men had higher participation rates than women at all ages. Hospitalized women and women taking medications had higher participation rate compared with nonhospitalized women (difference=0.7%-3.0%) and female nonusers (difference=0.8%-7.6%), respectively, whereas no consistent pattern was found among men according to hospitalization or medication use status. Men used fewer medications than women, but they underreported medication use to a similar degree as did women. CONCLUSIONS:Hospitalized women, as well as women using prescription medicine, were slightly overrepresented in the surveys. Hence, the study found some evidence that selection bias in surveys may contribute to the explanation of the health-survival paradox, but its contribution is likely to be small. However, there was no evidence for sex-specific reporting of medication use among study participants.

| S-EPMC2696561 | biostudies-literature

Reporting of loss to follow-up information in randomised controlled trials with time-to-event outcomes: a literature survey.

Project description:BACKGROUND: To assess the reporting of loss to follow-up (LTFU) information in articles on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with time-to-event outcomes, and to assess whether discrepancies affect the validity of study results. METHODS: Literature survey of all issues of the BMJ, Lancet, JAMA, and New England Journal of Medicine published between 2003 and 2005. Eligible articles were reports of RCTs including at least one Kaplan-Meier plot. Articles were classified as "assessable" if sufficient information was available to assess LTFU. In these articles, LTFU information was derived from Kaplan-Meier plots, extracted from the text, and compared. Articles were then classified as "consistent" or "not consistent". Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the validity of study results. RESULTS: 319 eligible articles were identified. 187 (59%) were classified as "assessable", as they included sufficient information for evaluation; 140 of 319 (44%) presented consistent LTFU information between the Kaplan-Meier plot and text. 47 of 319 (15%) were classified as "not consistent". These 47 articles were included in sensitivity analyses. When various imputation methods were used, the results of a chi2-test applied to the corresponding 2 × 2 table changed and hence were not robust in about half of the studies. CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of the articles on RCTs using Kaplan-Meier plots provide assessable and consistent LTFU information, thus questioning the validity of the results and conclusions of many studies presenting survival analyses. Authors should improve the presentation of both Kaplan-Meier plots and LTFU information, and reviewers of study publications and journal editors should critically appraise the validity of the information provided.

| S-EPMC3189898 | biostudies-other

Private but not social information validity modulates social conformity bias.

Project description:It is well established that human behaviors are susceptible to others' opinions. However, optimal decision theory mandates choices be made upon the estimated validities of different information sources and little is known about whether and how people could wean themselves off social conformity bias, especially when the social signals are uninformative. Here, we asked subjects to participate in a probabilistic urn guessing task based on their private information as well as observed choices from their partners. Specifically, we manipulated the information validity of these two sources such that only the private evidence was informative. Across trials, social conformity declined, manifested by the increased influence of the private evidence but steady effect of social information. Correspondingly, we found dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) was involved in detecting the conflict of private and social information and conforming to social signal whereas striatum was responsible for selectively updating the influence of private (but not social) evidence contingent on its inferred validity. Furthermore, functional coupling between striatum and dmPFC predicted the resistance toward the influence of social information. Together, these results may provide a mechanistic account of how the conformity bias toward uninformative social information can be remedied.

| S-EPMC6865577 | biostudies-literature

Crowd control: Reducing individual estimation bias by sharing biased social information.

Project description:Cognitive biases are widespread in humans and animals alike, and can sometimes be reinforced by social interactions. One prime bias in judgment and decision-making is the human tendency to underestimate large quantities. Previous research on social influence in estimation tasks has generally focused on the impact of single estimates on individual and collective accuracy, showing that randomly sharing estimates does not reduce the underestimation bias. Here, we test a method of social information sharing that exploits the known relationship between the true value and the level of underestimation, and study if it can counteract the underestimation bias. We performed estimation experiments in which participants had to estimate a series of quantities twice, before and after receiving estimates from one or several group members. Our purpose was threefold: to study (i) whether restructuring the sharing of social information can reduce the underestimation bias, (ii) how the number of estimates received affects the sensitivity to social influence and estimation accuracy, and (iii) the mechanisms underlying the integration of multiple estimates. Our restructuring of social interactions successfully countered the underestimation bias. Moreover, we find that sharing more than one estimate also reduces the underestimation bias. Underlying our results are a human tendency to herd, to trust larger estimates than one's own more than smaller estimates, and to follow disparate social information less. Using a computational modeling approach, we demonstrate that these effects are indeed key to explain the experimental results. Overall, our results show that existing knowledge on biases can be used to dampen their negative effects and boost judgment accuracy, paving the way for combating other cognitive biases threatening collective systems.

| S-EPMC8659305 | biostudies-literature

Academic information on Twitter: A user survey.

Project description:Although counts of tweets citing academic papers are used as an informal indicator of interest, little is known about who tweets academic papers and who uses Twitter to find scholarly information. Without knowing this, it is difficult to draw useful conclusions from a publication being frequently tweeted. This study surveyed 1,912 users that have tweeted journal articles to ask about their scholarly-related Twitter uses. Almost half of the respondents (45%) did not work in academia, despite the sample probably being biased towards academics. Twitter was used most by people with a social science or humanities background. People tend to leverage social ties on Twitter to find information rather than searching for relevant tweets. Twitter is used in academia to acquire and share real-time information and to develop connections with others. Motivations for using Twitter vary by discipline, occupation, and employment sector, but not much by gender. These factors also influence the sharing of different types of academic information. This study provides evidence that Twitter plays a significant role in the discovery of scholarly information and cross-disciplinary knowledge spreading. Most importantly, the large numbers of non-academic users support the claims of those using tweet counts as evidence for the non-academic impacts of scholarly research.

| S-EPMC5957360 | biostudies-literature

A Review of Key Likert Scale Development Advances: 1995-2019.

Project description:Developing self-report Likert scales is an essential part of modern psychology. However, it is hard for psychologists to remain apprised of best practices as methodological developments accumulate. To address this, this current paper offers a selective review of advances in Likert scale development that have occurred over the past 25 years. We reviewed six major measurement journals (e.g., Psychological Methods, Educational, and Psychological Measurement) between the years 1995-2019 and identified key advances, ultimately including 40 papers and offering written summaries of each. We supplemented this review with an in-depth discussion of five particular advances: (1) conceptions of construct validity, (2) creating better construct definitions, (3) readability tests for generating items, (4) alternative measures of precision [e.g., coefficient omega and item response theory (IRT) information], and (5) ant colony optimization (ACO) for creating short forms. The Supplementary Material provides further technical details on these advances and offers guidance on software implementation. This paper is intended to be a resource for psychological researchers to be informed about more recent psychometric progress in Likert scale creation.

| S-EPMC8129175 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data