Measurement error when surveying issue positions: a MultiTrait MultiError approach

Abstract Voters’ issue preferences are key determinants of vote choice, making it essential to reduce measurement error in responses to issue questions in surveys. This study uses a MultiTrait MultiError approach to assess the data quality of issue questions by separating four sources of variation: trait, acquiescence, method, and random error. The questions generally achieved moderate data quality, with 76% on average representing valid variance. Random error made up the largest proportion of error (23%). Error due to method and acquiescence was small. We found that 5-point scales are generally better than 11-point scales, while answers by respondents with lower political sophistication achieved lower data quality. The findings indicate a need to focus on decreasing random error when studying issue positions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Political Science Research and Methods
Published
2025-05-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2025.31
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Statistical Methods and Inference
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.63
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Measurement error when surveying issue positions: a MultiTrait MultiError approach

Kim Backström, Peter Söderlund, Alexandru Cernat, Rasmus Sirén
1 citations
Political Science Research and Methods
Statistical Methods and Inference
2.63
article

Measurement error when surveying issue positions: a MultiTrait MultiError approach

Kim Backström, Peter Söderlund, Alexandru Cernat, Rasmus Sirén
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Voters’ issue preferences are key determinants of vote choice, making it essential to reduce measurement error in responses to issue questions in surveys. This study uses a MultiTrait MultiError approach to assess the data quality of issue questions by separating four sources of variation: trait, acquiescence, method, and random error. The questions generally achieved moderate data quality, with 76% on average representing valid variance. Random error made up the largest proportion of error (23%). Error due to method and acquiescence was small. We found that 5-point scales are generally better than 11-point scales, while answers by respondents with lower political sophistication achieved lower data quality. The findings indicate a need to focus on decreasing random error when studying issue positions.

Political Science Research and MethodsVol. 14(2)
Åbo Akademi University (FI), University of Helsinki (FI), University of Manchester (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Statistical Methods and Inference
2.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Measurement error when surveying issue positions: a MultiTrait MultiError approach — Kim Backström, Peter Söderlund, et al. · Political Science Research and Methods (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS