A Catalog of Biases in Questionnaires: Volume 2: No. 1 JANUARY 2005
A Catalog of Biases in Questionnaires: Volume 2: No. 1 JANUARY 2005
A Catalog of Biases in Questionnaires: Volume 2: No. 1 JANUARY 2005
1 JANUARY 2005
SPECIAL TOPICS
Suggested citation for this article: Choi BCK, Pak AWP. A inferences from the truth, or processes leading to such a
catalog of biases in questionnaires. Prev Chronic Dis [seri- deviation” (2). Questionnaire bias is a result of unantici-
al online] 2005 Jan [date cited]. Available from: URL: pated communication barriers between the investigator
http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/ 04_0050.htm. and respondents that yield inaccurate results. Bias may
arise from the way individual questions are designed, the
PEER REVIEWED way the questionnaire as a whole is designed, and how the
questionnaire is administered or completed.
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 1
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
Complex question. Complex and lengthy questions sion’s technical terms may not be understood by the gen-
should be avoided in a questionnaire. eral public and should be avoided.
Example: Has it happened to you that over a long period Example: What was your age at menarche?
of time, when you neither practiced abstinence,
nor used birth control, you did not conceive? What was your age when your menstrual peri-
ods started?
This question, which was used in a survey on family
planning conducted for the Royal Commission on The technical term in the first question may not be
Population (8), is vague (“a long period of time”), too for- understood by many women, so it is preferable to ask the
mal (“Has it happened to you that”), and complex, same question in more common terms, as in the second
because of its length and use of the neither/nor question (9).
construction.
Uncommon word. Uncommon and difficult words
Double-barrelled question (also known as two ques- should be avoided in questionnaires.
tions in one). Questions that are made up of two or more
questions make it difficult for the respondent to know Example: Gowers (11) and Day (12) have produced lists
which part of the question to answer and for the investi- of words that can be replaced by simpler alternatives. For
gator to know which part of the question the respondent example:
actually answered (9).
Uncommon Common
Example: Do you agree that acquired immunodeficiency Assist Help
syndrome (AIDS) can be transmitted by shak- Consider Think
ing hands with a person with AIDS or through Effectuate Cause
other means of physical contact? Elucidate Explain
Employ Use
A “no” answer may mean not by shaking hands, or not Initiate Begin/Start
through other means of physical contact, or both (1). Major Important/Main
Perform Do
Short question. Short questions may not be as accu- Quantify Measure
rately answered as questions that are longer. A ques- Require Want/Need
tion that is short may come across as abrupt in an inter- Reside Live
view situation. Questions that include a transition to State Say
the next topic give respondents more time to gather Sufficient Enough
their thoughts and also more clues to use in formulating Terminate End
their responses (7). Ultimate Last
Utilize Use
Example: Have you had bad sore throats?
Use common words in questionnaires, especially ques-
Now a question about bad sore throats. We’re tionnaires targeted for the general population, to avoid
looking for information about these. Have you misunderstanding.
had bad sore throats?
Vague word. Vague words in vague questions encour-
The first question has been found to be less accurately age vague answers (1).
answered than the second question when compared with
information obtained from the respondents’ physicians Example: How often do you exercise?
(10). The second question includes an introduction that [ ] Regularly
sets up the query. [ ] Occasionally
Technical jargon. Technical jargon and the profes- How often do you exercise?
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
2 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
[ ] twice a week or more often recover the original continuous data or to change cut-off
[ ] once a week criteria for categories (7).
[ ] less than once a week
Example: What is your birth date?
The first question is vague because “occasionally” and
“regularly” are not defined. The meaning can easily be What is your age in years?
made more precise, as in the second question.
Which age category do you belong to?
Missing or inadequate data for intended purpose
For information on age, the first question is the best
Belief vs behavior (also known as hypothetical ques- because it can provide accurate continuous data, followed
tion or personalized question). Questions that ask the by the second question. The third question is the least
respondent about a belief (hypothetical) can yield quite dif- desirable because data are degraded (1).
ferent answers than questions that ask the respondent
about his or her behaviors (personalized) (9). Insensitive measure. When outcome measures make
it impossible to detect clinically significant changes or dif-
Example: Do you think that it is a good idea to have ferences, Type II errors occur (3).
everyone’s chest regularly checked by X-ray?
Example: How important is health to you, on a scale of 1
Have you ever had yours checked? to 3?
(Unimportant) 1 - 2 - 3 (Important)
The two questions generated different results. Ninety-
six percent of the respondents answered “yes” to the first How important is health to you, on a scale of 1
question, but only 54% answered “yes” to the second (13). to 10?
The answers to both questions may be accurate even (Unimportant) 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 (Important)
though the results are different. The investigator must
determine whether the purpose of the question is to col-
lect data regarding a belief or a behavior and design the The first question may not have sufficient discriminat-
question accordingly. ing power to differentiate the respondents because of the
limited categories. The second question may be better.
Starting time. Failure to identify a common starting
time for exposure or illness may lead to bias (3). Faulty scale
Example: In the last 12 months, have you had an acci- Forced choice (also known as insufficient category).
dent causing head injury? Questions that provide too few categories can force respon-
dents to choose imprecisely among limited options (7,9).
Because a survey is normally conducted over an extend-
ed period, the time frame of “last 12 months” will vary Example: Do you agree? Yes [ ] No [ ]
depending on the date of the interview. The data obtained
therefore cannot be used to estimate incidence rates. The Do you agree? Yes [ ] No [ ] Don’t Know [ ]
following question is better and will provide a common
time frame: The first question, which does not have a “don’t know”
category, may produce a bias because respondents who
From January 1 to December 31 of last year, have no opinion are forced to select an answer that may or
did you have an accident causing head injury? may not reflect their true feelings. The second question is
recommended.
Data degradation. It is better to collect accurate, con-
tinuous data at source instead of degraded data. Once
degraded data have been collected, it is impossible to Missing interval. Missing intervals in response choic-
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 3
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
Example: How many cigarettes do you smoke per day? This negatively worded question leads respondents to
[ ] None [ ] 5 or less [ ] 5-25 [ ] 25 or more answer no (14). The preferred phrasing is, “Do you agree
or disagree that . . . ?”
Respondents smoking exactly 5 or 25 cigarettes per day
do not know in which category to place themselves. The Mind-set. The mind-set of the respondent can affect his
following question is more appropriate: or her perception of questions and therefore can affect
answers.
How many cigarettes do you smoke per day?
[ ] None [ ] 4 or less [ ] 5-24 [ ] 25 or more Example: 1. How many cigarettes do you smoke per week?
2. How many cigars do you smoke per week?
Scale format. An even or an odd number of categories 3. How many beers do you drink per month?
in the scale for the respondents to choose from may pro-
duce different results. The change in wording from “per week” to “per month”
can result in wrong answers for the third question above,
Example: Do you agree? (Agree) 1 – 2 – 3 (Disagree) because of the possible mind-set of the respondents.
Do you agree? (Agree) 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 (Disagree)
Intrusiveness
The first question, with an odd number of categories,
tends to result in neutral answers (i.e., 2), and the second Reporting (also known as self-report response). A
question, with an even number of categories, tends to force respondent may selectively suppress information, such as
respondents to take sides (1). The two approaches produce past history of sexually transmitted disease (2,15).
different results, but there is no general consensus as to
which one is better. Example: In the past five years, have you engaged in anal
intercourse, that is, rectal intercourse?
Leading questions
This question is so direct and up-front that many people
Framing. Some questions may be framed in such a may refuse to answer. The following question may reduce
manner that respondents choose an inaccurate answer. reporting bias by deliberately loading the question to sug-
Example: Which operation would you prefer? gest that others also engage in the behavior (1): People
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
4 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
practice many different sexual activities, and some people and the second question (1995 NCHS-NHIS) (1) has five
practice things that other people do not. In the past five categories. Therefore, the categories may not mean exact-
years, have you engaged in anal intercourse, that is, rectal ly the same in the two surveys and will cause a problem for
intercourse? comparison over time.
Sensitive question. Sensitive questions, such as age, Change of wording. If the precise wording of a ques-
personal or household incomes, sexual orientation, or mar- tion changes in different surveys, the results may not be
ital status, may elicit inaccurate answers and may also comparable (7).
affect the interviewer-interviewee relationship so that all
subsequent answers can be affected. Example: Compared to other persons your age, would you
say your health is excellent, good, fair, or poor?
Example: How old are you?
Would you say your health in general is excel-
In what year were you born? lent, very good, good, fair, or poor?
The first question, which is direct, tends to result in a The first question (1985 NCHS-NHIS) (1) and the sec-
high percentage of refusals to answer. The second question ond question (1995 NCHS-NHIS) (1) use different word-
tends to yield fairly accurate responses (1). ing, namely, “compared to other persons your age” vs “in
general.” This may guide respondents to evaluate their
Inconsistency health in a different context.
Case definition. Definition of cases based on different Diagnostic vogue. The same illness may receive dif-
versions of the International Classification of Disease ferent diagnostic labels at different points in space or
(ICD) codes, for example, or first-ever cases vs recurrent time (3).
cases, may change over time or across regions, resulting in
inaccurate trends and geographic comparisons (16). Example: Do you have bronchitis?
Example: How many bladder cancer cases do you see in a Do you have emphysema?
year?
The terms “bronchitis” and “emphysema” are used in
How many histologically confirmed bladder Great Britain and in North America, respectively, to refer
cancer cases do you see in a year? to the same disease (3). It is therefore important to use the
term that is appropriate in space and time.
The use of two different case definitions can present
problems when comparing results.
Types of Bias in Questionnaire Design
Change of scale. If the measurement scale for a quan-
tity changes in different surveys, the results may not be Formatting problem
comparable.
Horizontal response format. In self-administered
Example: Compared to other persons your age, would you questionnaires, horizontal vs vertical format of the
say your health is excellent, good, fair, or poor? response choices can affect the answers (17).
Would you say your health in general is excel- Example: Your health is:
lent, very good, good, fair, or poor? Excellent ... [ ] Good ... [ ] Fair ... [ ] Poor ... [ ]
The first question, which was used in the 1985 National Your health is:
Center for Health Statistics National Health Interview Excellent . . . . [ ]
Survey (NCHS-NHIS) (1), has four categories of health, Good . . . . . . . [ ]
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 5
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
6 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 7
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
Respondents tend to give positive answers when 1. Have you smoked at least 100 cigarettes in your entire
answering questions on satisfaction (1). life?
Respondent’s conscious reaction 2. Last year, were you smoking cigarettes every day?
Faking bad (also known as hello-goodbye effect). 3. Do you now smoke cigarettes every day?
Respondents try to appear sick to qualify for support (1).
Unacceptability. Measurements which hurt, embar-
Example: Which of the following symptoms do you have? rass, invade privacy, or require excessive commitment
may be systematically refused or evaded (3).
Respondents tend to check more types of symptoms than
they have (1). Example (22): We would now require two urine speci-
mens from you. The first specimen will be collected over a
Faking good (also known as social desirability, obse- 24-hour period, part of which will be while you are in your
quiousness). Respondents may systematically alter ques- natural working environment, probably toward the end of
tionnaire responses in the direction they perceive to be the work week, such as on a Friday. The second specimen
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
8 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
will be taken over another 24-hour period while you are at ly alter questionnaire responses when, during the process
home, out of the work environment for at least 24 hours, of answering the questionnaire, they think they know the
such as on a Sunday. During collection, keep all urine sam- study hypothesis.
ples refrigerated, in the refrigerator at home, or by the
portable thermos bottle and ice-packs at work. When fin- Example: Yes No
ished, please call the taxi company with the instruction 1. Does your child have headaches? . . . . . . . . . . .[ ] [ ]
sheet to deliver the samples to the laboratory. 2. Does your child play with
battery-operated toys? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .[ ] [ ]
Avoid measurements by intrusive means, or consider 3. Does your child play with batteries? . . . . . . . . .[ ] [ ]
using incentives to increase participation rate. 4. How many and which types of batteries do you have at
home?
Underlying cause (also known as rumination). Cases
may ruminate about possible causes for their illness and The respondents, perceiving that the study is about
thus exhibit different recall of prior exposures from those headache and battery use, may overreport the number of
of controls (3). batteries if they have a child with headaches.
Example: Did you have skull x-rays in the past five years? Respondent’s inaccurate recall
In a case-control study of childhood brain tumors, a sig- Primacy and recency. Depending on the type of ques-
nificantly elevated risk was reported by cases for skull x- tionnaire (interviewer-administered questionnaires or
rays compared to controls (23). It is not known whether self-administered questionnaires), respondents may
this was a true effect of x-rays on brain tumors or of cases’ choose answers differently.
thinking that x-rays were the cause of their illness.
Example: (24): Which of the following types of doctors did
Respondent’s learning you see in the past year?
[ ] family doctor
Learning. Completing a questionnaire can be a learn- [ ] pediatrician
ing experience for the respondent about the hypotheses [ ] lung doctor/internist
and expected answers in a study. [ ] allergy doctor/immunologist
[ ] emergency room doctor
Example (24): [ ] some other kind
1. Which of the following investigations would
you order for a patient of yours with asthma- Research has indicated that in mailed surveys, respon-
like symptoms? dents may tend to choose the first few response options on
[ ] spirometry the list (primacy bias), though in telephone or personal
[ ] lung volumes, diffusing capacity interview surveys, they are more likely to respond in favor
[ ] peak expiratory flow rate of the later categories (recency bias) (25,26). These effects
[ ] chest X-ray can be minimized by reducing the number of categories
presented to respondents and by randomizing the order of
2. Under what conditions would you order categories in survey instruments.
spirometry for a patient?
Proxy respondent (also known as surrogate data). For
Having thought about prior questions (such as the first deceased cases or surviving cases (e.g., brain tumors)
question) can affect the respondent’s answer to subsequent whose ability to recall details is defective, soliciting infor-
questions (e.g., the second question) through the learning mation from proxies (e.g., spouse, family members) may
process as the questionnaire is completed. To avoid learn- result in differential data accuracy. In general, it is not
ing bias, it may be necessary to randomize the order of the advisable to ask someone to answer attitudinal, knowl-
questions for different respondents. edge, or behavior questions for others (1).
Hypothesis guessing. Respondents may systematical- Example: 1. What is your wife’s occupation?
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 9
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
2. Please tell me how afraid your wife is of representing annual, not monthly, income. This question
getting cancer? would be appropriate for a survey in Asia, however, since
Not at all afraid Extremely afraid the culture there is to report monthly income. Pretesting
1 2 3 4 5 the survey instrument should minimize this bias.
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
10 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
biases. They are therefore not included in our catalog of University Press; 1986.
questionnaire biases. 10. Marquis KH. An experimental study of the effects of
reinforcement, question length, and reinterviews on
reporting selected chronic conditions in household
Author Information interviews. Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan,
Institute for Social Research, Survey Research Centre;
Corresponding author: Bernard C.K. Choi, PhD, 1969.
Department of Public Health Sciences, Faculty of 11. Gowers EA. The complete plain words. London:
Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Penguin (Pelican) Books; 1954.
Canada, Department of Epidemiology and Community 12. Day RA. How to write and publish a scientific paper.
Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, 5th ed. Phoenix (AZ): Oryx Press; 1998.
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, Centre for Chronic Disease 13. David ST. Public opinion concerning tuberculosis.
Prevention and Control, Public Health Agency of Canada, Tubercle (Journal of the British Tuberculosis
Room A147, 120 Colonnade Road, PL# 6701A, Ottawa, Association) 1952;33:78-90.
Ontario, Canada K1A 1B4. Telephone: 613-957-1074. 14. Schlesselman JJ. Case-control studies: design, con-
Email: Bernard_Choi@phac-aspc.gc.ca. duct, analysis. New York: Oxford University Press;
1982.
Author affiliations: Anita W.P. Pak, PhD, Office of 15. Fennema JS, van Ameijden EJ, Coutinho RA, van den
Institutional Research, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Hoek JA. Validity of self-reported sexually transmit-
Ontario, Canada. ted disease in a cohort of drug-using prostitutes in
Amsterdam: trends from 1986 to 1992. Int J Epidemiol
1995;24:1034-41.
References 16. May DS, Kittner SJ. Use of medicare claims data to
estimate national trends in stroke incidence, 1985-
1. Aday LA. Designing and conducting health surveys. 1991. Stroke 1994;25:2343-7.
2nd ed. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; 1996. 17. Dillman DA. Mail and telephone surveys: the total
2. Last JM. A dictionary of epidemiology. New York design method. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc;
(NY): Oxford University Press; 2001. 1978.
3. Sackett DL. Bias in analytic research. J Chron Dis 18. Hunt DM, Magruder S, Bolon DS. Questionnaire for-
1979;32:51-63. mat bias: when are juxtaposed scales appropriate: a
4. Choi BC, Noseworthy AL. Classification, direction, call for further research. Psychol Reports
and prevention of bias in epidemiologic research. J 1995;77:931-41.
Occup Med 1992;34:265-71. 19. Hartge P, Cahill J. Field methods in epidemiology. In:
5. Choi BC, Pak AWP. Bias, overview. In: Armitage P, Rothman KJ, Greenland S, editors. Modern epidemi-
Colton T, editors. Encyclopedia of biostatistics. Vol 1. ology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott-Raven
Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1998. p. 331-8. Publishers; 1998. p. 163-80.
6. Delgado-Rodriguez M, Llorca J. Bias. J Epidemiol 20. Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Types of epidemiologic
Community Health 2004;58:635-41. studies. In: Rothman KJ, Greenland S, eds. Modern
7. Foddy W. Constructing questions for interviews and epidemiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott-
questionnaires: theory and practice in social research. Raven Publishers; 1998. p. 67-78.
Cambridge (United Kingdom): Cambridge University 21. Sudman S, Bradburn NM. Asking questions: a practi-
Press; 1993. cal guide to questionnaire design. San Francisco (CA):
8. Lewis-Faning E. Report on an enquiry into family lim- Jossey-Bass Publishers; 1982.
itation and its influence on human fertility during the 22. Choi BC, Connolly JG, Zhou RH. Application of uri-
past fifty years. Vol 1. London: Her Majesty’s nary mutagen testing to detect workplace hazardous
Stationery Office, Royal Commission on Population; exposure and bladder cancer. Mutat Res
1949. 1995;341:207-16.
9. Kelsey JL, Thompson WD, Evans AS. Methods in 23. Howe GR, Burch JD, Chiarelli AM, Risch HA, Choi
observational epidemiology. New York: Oxford BC. An exploratory case-control study of brain
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 11
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
12 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm
VOLUME 2: NO. 1
JANUARY 2005
Table
Table. Sources of Questionnaire Bias
2. Questionnaire Design
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only
and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2005/jan/04_0050.htm • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 13