Here - Tilburg University

Presenter
Liebig, Stefan; University of Bielefeld
Authors
Stefan Liebig and Carsten Sauer; University of Bielefeld
Katrin Auspurg, and Thomas Hinz; University of Konstanz
Title
Just gross earnings: Why respondents prefer lower inequalities in earnings while
an inter-viewer is sitting next to them.
Abstract
The factorial survey design has become a popular method in survey
research. It integrates experimental set-ups into a survey: Respondents react to
hypothetical descriptions (vignettes) while the values of each attribute
(dimen¬sion) systematically vary in order to estimate the impact of each
dimension on respondents' judgments. So far there is only little empirical
knowledge if and to what extent this approach causes methodological artefacts
especially in attitude research. Using the example of justice evaluations of gross
earnings we address two methodological problems in this paper. First, as
respondents have to evaluate a number of complex descriptions (vignettes of
fictitious earners) the complexity may result in quite arbitrary reactions, varying
from time to time and causing a very low reliability of the instrument. Second,
as the factorial survey was designed for an indirect measurement of attitudes
one of its advantages is seemingly a low sensitivity for social desirability
response sets. Therefore we present two studies focusing (1) on the reliability of
attitude measures using a test-retest design (three wave panel study, 2008) and
(2) on the sensitivity for interviewer effects using a mixed mode design (German
population survey, 2009). The results based on the student panel study show a
fairly high reliability of the attitude measurement. In the population survey we
find strong interviewer effects, meaning that the perceived just magnitude of
income inequality is more egalitarian in the presence of an interviewer than in
the absence of an interviewer. We discuss the latter from a methodological but
also from a substantial point of view as it is in line with the experimental findings
from behavioral economics and an evolutionary theory of justice attitudes.