Separating truth from error: A closer look at the effect of grouped versus intermixed questionnaire format

L. L. Zhang (First Author), Jiing-Lih Farh (Participant Author)

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal

1 Citation (Web of Science)

Abstract

A topic of ongoing debate in survey research is whether items measuring different constructs should be grouped by construct or intermixed. Previous researchers have failed to reach a consensus on whether grouping or intermixing measurement items leads to better construct validity. The inconsistency of their findings has to a large extent resulted from a tendency to confound true variance and systematic error variance. Drawing on measurement and cognitive theories, we propose that for established measures with satisfactory psychometric properties, grouped items capture less unsystematic and systematic error variance and more true variance than their intermixed counterparts. This argument is supported by the findings of a field experiment with 853 students in 142 project teams, who reported their teams’ relationship and task conflict on grouped and intermixed items. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings for researchers who use survey instruments are discussed.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)881-901
JournalAsia Pacific Journal of Management
Volume36
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Corresponding author email

lidazhang@umac.mo

Keywords

  • Error variance
  • Grouping items
  • Intermixing items
  • Knowledge accessibility
  • Knowledge applicability
  • True variance

Indexed by

  • ABDC-A
  • SSCI

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Separating truth from error: A closer look at the effect of grouped versus intermixed questionnaire format'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this