Precisely articulated survey questions contaminate respondents’ natural answers

Evidence

The insight embedded in Straus’s approach — that you had to ask about specific behaviors, not about categories like “abuse” that subjects would deny — was methodologically foundational. It was the same insight that drove Felitti’s questionnaire design for the ACE Study: don’t ask “were you abused?” Ask “were you hit?” Ask “did an adult in your household do this specific thing to you?” The behavioral specificity was what made the data real. — , The Rod and the Child, 9768 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

The fallacy of the compound (or complex or multiple) question occurs when an argument is phrased as a single question rather than the two or more separate questions actually in the interrogatory. Several questions are combined in such a manner as to place the person who responds in a self-incriminating position. When the question is complex and all aspects are to be denied, they should be denied individually. To require a single answer to the final part of the complex question (Now, answer yes or no!) often may lead to the unwarranted assumption of the truth of another matter or conclusion hidden in the question. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1154 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Imprecise survey questions manufacture the illusion of generalized trust; Asking about specific behaviors rather than abuse yields truthful data — , The Rod and the Child: A Global History…, 9768; Requiring a single yes-or-no answer to a compound question smuggles in an unproven assumption — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1154 (+3 more)

Broader Connections