Lengthy surveys take more time and induce the use of undesired response styles. Response styles generate biases in responses, particularly in lengthy surveys (Baumgartner & Steenkamp, 2001). Response style is defined as tendency to systematically respond to questionnaire items regardless of item content (Baumgartner & Steenkamp, 2001). In practice, market research agencies prefer to use split questionnaires where questionnaires split into parts and each subset is administered to a randomly selected group of respondents (Raghunathan & Grizzle 1995). So far, split questionnaire design literature has been mainly investigated estimation and inference (Lord, 1962; Shoemaker, 1973; Merkouris, 2014; Chipperfield, Barr, & Steel, 2017), data imputation (Raghunathan & Grizzle, 1995; Rässler et al. 2002), and optimal designs (Thomas et al. 2006; Adıgüzel & Wedel 2008; Gonzalez & Eltinge, 2008; Chipperfield & Steel, 2009; Chipperfield & Steel, 2011). Despite split questionnaire is recommended to reduce undesired response styles, its relationship with response styles remains unclear. Two methods of optimal split questionnaire designs were proposed (Adıgüzel & Wedel, 2008): 1) Between-block design: To select entire blocks of questions, 2) Within-block design: To select sets of questions in each block. In this paper, we examine empirically how split designs lessen different type of response styles. Our findings indicate that split questionnaires reduce acquiescence balance, and disacquiescence relative to full questionnaires. The within-block split surveys reduce disacquiescence, acquiescence and balance, whereas the between-block ones did not. Stylistic responding is also influenced by questionnaire satisfaction, attitude, length and mood. Disacquiescence is negatively correlated to mood, questionnaire length and attitude. Midpoint is positively correlated to length, but negatively to questionnaire satisfaction, while acquiescence is opposite for both.

목 적: 20대 대학생을 대상으로 McMonnies 및 Ocular Surface Disease Index(ODSI) 건성안 설문지를 이용한 건성안 유병률을 비교하고 그 차이를 확인하고자 하였다. 방 법: 전국 10개 대학교 안경광학과에 재학 중인 대학생 1,157명을 대상으로 McMonnies 및 OSDI(Ocular Surface Diseease Index) 설문지를 이용하여 건성안 정도를 조사하였다. 증상의 정도를 정량화하여 두 설문지의 유병률을 비교한 후 카파 계수(kappa coefficient)를 활용하여 유병률 일치도가 가장 높은 분류기준점을 찾고자 하였다. 결 과: McMonnies설문은 기준점이 14.5점 기준일 때 유병률이 7.1%였고 OSDI설문은 23.5점 기준일 때 41.6%였으며 일치도(kappa coefficient)는 매우 낮았다(k=0.292, p

본 연구의 목적은 각 대학의 특성과 수업의 특성에 적합한 강의평가 문항을 개발하는데 기초가 되는 자료를 제시하는 것을 목적으로 하였다. 이를 위하여 선행연구 및 여러 대학에서 현재 실시되고 있는 강의평가문항을 분석하여 강의평가문항 풀을 구성하였고, 이를 기초로 서울과 수도권에 위치한 4개 대학 600여명 학생들을 대상으로 설문조사를 실시하였다. 본 연구에 사용된 설문지는 공통형 문항과 수업특성별 선택형 문항으로 구성되며, 전체적 만족도, 학생에 대한 태도, 수업내용 및 진행, 시험․과제․평가, 수업성과 및 적절성, 이론중심 교수법, 실험․실습․실기중심 교수법 영역에서 총 109개 문항이 선정되었다. 설문조사의 분석방법은 내용 분석 및 빈도 분석이었다. 분석 결과, ‘성실’, ‘존중’, ‘열의’, ‘분명한 수업 목적’, ‘주의 깊은 답변’이 강의평가문항으로 구성되어야 하는 가장 기초적인 요소로 분석되었다. 이는 대학의 특성과 관계없이 연구에 참여한 모든 학생들의 공통적인 의견으로 강의평가 문항을 개발할 때, 가장 크게 고려해야 할 요소라고 할 수 있다. 이런 점을 고려하여, 각 대학에서는 본 연구에서 제안한 강의평가 문항의 풀을 활용하되 각 대학의 특성과 규모를 고려한 평가 문항이 개발되어야 할 것이다.

Other comments on matters satisfaction survey through questionnaires typically measure by frequency analysis method is performed, the short answer for how to apply. These satisfaction surveys, however, because of the environment and atmosphere of its target at the time of the survey, personal psychological state, depending on the scale of change in business or policy of customer satisfaction feedback, there is a problem. This survey results, tangible results in terms of the feasibility of the business and policy indirectly as a result, which has been used as a material fact is. New survey method is show how the business and policy objectives than can be reflected positively in the present study, and comparing these surveys in a variety of ways for the analytical method proposed by KANO, Timko results suggested. Should be an ongoing investigation, and different survey methods for the study on the same sample the actual observed by comparing the results for the superiority of the new results presented.

The purpose of this study was to review existing assessment tools for patients with low back pain and improve them through combination. A total of 314 patients with low back pain participated. Their condition was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ), the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPD), and the Back Pain Functional Scale (BPFS). Rasch analysis was applied to identify inappropriate items, item difficulties, and the separation index. In this study, the 'sex life' item of the ODQ (10 items) and the 'sleeping' item of the BPFS (12 items) showed misfit statistics, whereas all items of the QBPD (20 items) were appropriate. After combining the ODQ, QBPD and BPFS, Rasch analysis was applied. The 'pain intensity', and the 'sex life' item of the ODQ and the 'throw a ball' item of QBPD showed misfit statistics. These 3 items were retained for further analysis. The remaining 42 combined ODQ-QBPD-BPFS items were arranged according to difficulty. For all subjects, the most difficult item was 'pain intensity', whereas the easiest was 'take food out of the refrigerator'. As the separation index of 42 combined ODQ-QBPD-BPFS was higher than that of the three questionnaires separately, difficulty of items varied with some need for rearrangement. The results of this study confirmed the possibility and need for a new back pain disability assessment tool, and produced one. Further study is needed to refine the questionnaire in consideration of psychosocial and occupational factors.